soo

[gdauber1]

No description provided.

[claude]

Claude finished @gdauber1's task —— View job

---

PR Review: Add optional userid parameter to getSsoAccessToken

I've reviewed the changes to src/modules/auth.ts and here's my comprehensive feedback:

Summary

The PR adds an optional userid parameter to the getSsoAccessToken method, allowing it to be passed as a URL query parameter. The implementation is clean and follows good practices.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

• Good parameter handling: The implementation correctly uses optional parameters with TypeScript (userid?: string)
• Clean URL construction: Separates URL path from query parameters properly
• Consistent with module patterns: Follows the same patterns used by other methods in the auth module
• Proper JSDoc documentation: Added parameter documentation with correct syntax

✅ No Major Bugs Identified

• The conditional logic userid ? { userid } : {} correctly handles the optional parameter
• Empty object {} for params when userid is not provided is the correct approach
• Axios will properly handle the params object and construct the query string

✅ Performance Considerations

• No performance concerns - the change is minimal and doesn't introduce any computational overhead
• The conditional object creation is negligible in terms of performance impact

⚠️ Security Considerations

• User ID exposure: The userid is passed as a URL query parameter, which means it will be:

  • Visible in server logs
  • Potentially cached by proxies/CDNs
  • Visible in browser history

  Consider if this is sensitive information that should be passed in request headers or body instead.

⚠️ Test Coverage

• Missing tests: The existing test file (tests/unit/auth.test.js) doesn't include any tests for getSsoAccessToken
• Recommend adding test cases for:
  • Calling without userid parameter
  • Calling with userid parameter
  • Verifying the correct URL construction with query parameters

📝 Additional Suggestions

1. PR Title: The current title "soo" appears to be a typo. Consider updating it to something more descriptive like "Add optional userid parameter to getSsoAccessToken"

2. PR Description: No description was provided. Adding a brief explanation of why this change is needed would help reviewers understand the context.

3. Consider adding example usage in JSDoc:

   /**
    * Get current user sso access token
    * @param {string} [userid] - Optional user ID to include as URL parameter
    * @returns {Promise<Object>} Current user sso access_token
    * @example
    * // Without userid
    * await auth.getSsoAccessToken()
    * 
    * // With userid
    * await auth.getSsoAccessToken('user-123')
    */

Recommended Tests to Add

describe('getSsoAccessToken()', () => {
  test('should fetch SSO access token without userid', async () => {
    const mockToken = { access_token: 'sso-token-123' };
    
    scope.get(`/api/apps/${appId}/auth/sso/accesstoken`)
      .reply(200, mockToken);
      
    const result = await base44.auth.getSsoAccessToken();
    expect(result).toEqual(mockToken);
    expect(scope.isDone()).toBe(true);
  });
  
  test('should fetch SSO access token with userid parameter', async () => {
    const mockToken = { access_token: 'sso-token-456' };
    const userid = 'user-123';
    
    scope.get(`/api/apps/${appId}/auth/sso/accesstoken`)
      .query({ userid })
      .reply(200, mockToken);
      
    const result = await base44.auth.getSsoAccessToken(userid);
    expect(result).toEqual(mockToken);
    expect(scope.isDone()).toBe(true);
  });
});

Overall, the implementation is solid but would benefit from test coverage and clarification on the security implications of passing user IDs in query parameters.

[github-actions]

🚀 Package Preview Available!

---

Install this PR's preview build with npm:

npm i @base44-preview/sdk@0.5.0-pr.21.09093c1

Prefer not to change any import paths? Install using npm alias so your code still imports @base44/sdk:

npm i "@base44/sdk@npm:@base44-preview/sdk@0.5.0-pr.21.09093c1"

Or add it to your package.json dependencies:

{
  "dependencies": {
    "@base44/sdk": "npm:@base44-preview/sdk@0.5.0-pr.21.09093c1"
  }
}

• 📦 Preview Package: @base44-preview/sdk@0.5.0-pr.21.09093c1
• 🔗 View this commit on GitHub

---

_{Preview published to npm registry — try new features instantly!}

[claude]

Claude finished @gdauber1's task —— View job

---

PR Review: Add userid parameter to getSsoAccessToken

I've reviewed the changes to src/modules/auth.ts and here's my comprehensive feedback:

Todo List

• Read src/modules/auth.ts to understand the changes
• Analyze code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Evaluate performance considerations
• Assess security concerns
• Review test coverage
• Provide constructive feedback

Summary

The PR modifies the getSsoAccessToken method to require a userid parameter that's included in the URL path. This is a breaking change that changes the method signature from getSsoAccessToken() to getSsoAccessToken(userid: string).

❌ Breaking Change Concerns

• Major Issue: This change makes userid a required parameter, which will break all existing code that calls getSsoAccessToken() without arguments
• Consider making the parameter optional to maintain backward compatibility:

  async getSsoAccessToken(userid?: string) {
    const url = userid 
      ? `/apps/${appId}/auth/sso/accesstoken/${userid}`
      : `/apps/${appId}/auth/sso/accesstoken`;
    return axios.get(url);
  }

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

• Good documentation: Added JSDoc parameter documentation
• Clean implementation: Simple and straightforward code change
• Consistent patterns: Follows the module's existing patterns

⚠️ Potential Bugs

• Type safety: The parameter is typed as string but there's no validation. Consider if empty strings or special characters need handling
• Error handling: No specific error handling for invalid user IDs

✅ Performance Considerations

• No performance concerns - the change is minimal

⚠️ Security Considerations

• User ID in URL path: Including user IDs in URL paths means they will be:
  • Visible in server access logs
  • Potentially cached by proxies/CDNs
  • Visible in browser developer tools
• Consider if this aligns with your security requirements

❌ Test Coverage

• No tests found: The test file tests/unit/auth.test.js doesn't include any tests for getSsoAccessToken
• Breaking change needs tests: Since this is a breaking change, comprehensive tests are crucial

📝 Recommendations

1. Make the parameter optional to avoid breaking existing code:

   async getSsoAccessToken(userid?: string) {
     const url = userid 
       ? `/apps/${appId}/auth/sso/accesstoken/${userid}`
       : `/apps/${appId}/auth/sso/accesstoken`;
     return axios.get(url);
   }

2. Update PR title and description:

   • Current title "soo" appears to be incomplete
   • Add a description explaining why this change is needed and that it's a breaking change

3. Add tests before merging:

   describe('getSsoAccessToken()', () => {
     test('should fetch SSO access token for specific user', async () => {
       const mockToken = { access_token: 'sso-token-123' };
       const userid = 'user-123';
       
       scope.get(`/api/apps/${appId}/auth/sso/accesstoken/${userid}`)
         .reply(200, mockToken);
         
       const result = await base44.auth.getSsoAccessToken(userid);
       expect(result).toEqual(mockToken);
     });
     
     // If made optional:
     test('should fetch SSO access token for current user', async () => {
       const mockToken = { access_token: 'sso-token-456' };
       
       scope.get(`/api/apps/${appId}/auth/sso/accesstoken`)
         .reply(200, mockToken);
         
       const result = await base44.auth.getSsoAccessToken();
       expect(result).toEqual(mockToken);
     });
   });

4. Version bump: Since this is a breaking change (if kept as required parameter), it should trigger a major version bump according to semver

⚠️ Critical Decision Required

Before merging, please clarify:

1. Is this intended to be a breaking change?
2. Should the method support both use cases (with and without userid)?
3. What's the migration path for existing users of this SDK?