chore: update tools.json #3611
chore: update tools.json #3611
Conversation
asyncapi-bot
requested review from
Mayaleeeee,
akshatnema,
anshgoyalevil,
asyncapi-bot-eve,
derberg and
magicmatatjahu
as code owners
WalkthroughThis pull request involves updates to three configuration files in the AsyncAPI project: Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3611 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 20 20
Lines 732 732
=========================================
Hits 732 732 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
✅ Deploy Preview for asyncapi-website ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
config/tools-automated.json (1)
Line range hint
443-457: Fix duplicate and inconsistent entries in GitHub Actions section.There are two issues:
- Duplicate entries for "GitHub Action for Generator"
- Inconsistent category name: "github-actions" vs "github-action" used elsewhere
Apply this fix:
- Remove the duplicate entry
- Standardize the category name to "github-action"
- "title": "GitHub Action for Generator", - "description": "CLI to work with your AsyncAPI files. You can validate them and in the future use a generator and even bootstrap a new file. Contributions are welcomed!", - "links": { - "repoUrl": "https://github.com/asyncapi/cli" - }, - "filters": { - "technology": [ - "AsyncAPI Generator" - ], - "categories": [ - "github-actions" - ], - "hasCommercial": false, - "isAsyncAPIOwner": true - }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
config/all-tags.json(1 hunks)config/tools-automated.json(14 hunks)config/tools.json(1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 180000ms (5)
- GitHub Check: Redirect rules - asyncapi-website
- GitHub Check: Header rules - asyncapi-website
- GitHub Check: Pages changed - asyncapi-website
- GitHub Check: Automerge PR autoapproved by a bot
- GitHub Check: Lighthouse CI
🔇 Additional comments (3)
config/all-tags.json (1)
1-1: LGTM! New technology entry follows consistent structure.The addition of "AsyncAPI CLI" technology maintains the established format and color scheme used throughout the file.
Let's verify the color consistency with other entries:
✅ Verification successful
Color scheme follows established pattern
The AsyncAPI CLI entry uses the most common color combination in the file (bg-[#61d0f2] border-[#40ccf7]), which is shared by 21 other technology entries. This appears to be an intentional default color scheme for related technologies.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if the new color values are used consistently across other entries # Extract unique color combinations echo "Unique color combinations:" cat config/all-tags.json | jq -r '.technologies[] | "\(.color) \(.borderColor)"' | sort | uniq -cLength of output: 732
config/tools-automated.json (1)
409-422: LGTM! GitHub Action for CLI entry is well-documented.The entry is properly structured with clear description and appropriate technology tags.
config/tools.json (1)
1-1: LGTM! Comprehensive reorganization of tools catalog.The complete replacement of tools.json provides:
- Clear categorization of tools
- Consistent metadata structure
- Comprehensive tool descriptions
- Proper technology and language tagging
Let's verify the JSON structure integrity:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Validate JSON structure and check for required fields # Verify JSON syntax jq '.' config/tools.json > /dev/null # Check that all tool entries have required fields jq -r ' . as $root | keys[] as $category | $root[$category].toolsList[] | select( .title == null or .description == null or .links == null or .filters == null ) | "\($category): \(.title // "NO_TITLE")" ' config/tools.json
| "description": null, | ||
| "links": { | ||
| "repoUrl": "https://github.com/asyncapi/cli" | ||
| "repoUrl": "https://github.com/actions-marketplace-validations/asyncapi_github-action-for-generator" | ||
| }, | ||
| "filters": { | ||
| "technology": [ | ||
| "AsyncAPI Generator" | ||
| ], | ||
| "categories": [ | ||
| "github-actions" | ||
| "github-action" | ||
| ], | ||
| "hasCommercial": false, | ||
| "isAsyncAPIOwner": true | ||
| "isAsyncAPIOwner": false |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add missing description for GitHub Action for Generator.
The description field is set to null, which should be populated with appropriate information.
|
⚡️ Lighthouse report for the changes in this PR:
Lighthouse ran on https://deploy-preview-3611--asyncapi-website.netlify.app/ |
Automated changes by create-pull-request GitHub action
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Changes
Documentation