fix(automations): add AutoTMM to condition validation

[s0up4200]

AutoManagement was added to the runtime evaluator in ba3d5d9 but the three API validation functions in the handler were not updated. This meant invalid AutoTMM rules (bad regex, unknown group IDs, references to fields requiring local access) could be saved without error, then silently never match at runtime.

Adds AutoManagement to conditionsUseField, conditionTreesForValidation, and collectConditionRegexErrors.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features
  • Added support for AutoManagement conditions in automation validation and grouping checks.
• Bug Fixes / Improvements
  • Expanded validation to include AutoManagement condition trees when present.
  • Improved regex validation and error reporting for AutoManagement conditions to surface invalid patterns.
• Tests
  • Added unit tests covering AutoManagement inclusion semantics, condition-tree validation, and regex error detection.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: f3a33d87-30f8-4b81-a4f5-26a7fa7d266a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 24ec3c0 and d2719ab.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• internal/api/handlers/automations_validation_test.go

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• internal/api/handlers/automations_validation_test.go

---

Walkthrough

Added AutoManagement condition support to automation validation: enabled AutoManagement.Condition is treated as using condition fields, its condition tree is included for grouping-ID validation, and regexes inside it are validated (errors reported under /conditions/autoManagement/condition). Tests covering these behaviors were added.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
AutoManagement Condition Handling internal/api/handlers/automations.go	Integrates AutoManagement.Condition into validation helpers: conditionsUseField treats an enabled AutoManagement.Condition as using specified ConditionField; conditionTreesForValidation includes AutoManagement.Condition when AutoManagement is present; collectConditionRegexErrors validates regexes in AutoManagement.Condition and reports failures at /conditions/autoManagement/condition.
Tests for AutoManagement Validation internal/api/handlers/automations_validation_test.go	Adds unit tests: TestConditionsUseFreeSpace covers AutoManagement cases, TestConditionTreesForValidation_AutoManagement checks inclusion semantics, and TestCollectConditionRegexErrors_AutoManagement verifies regex error reporting for valid/invalid patterns.

Sequence Diagram(s)

(Skipped)

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• feat(automations): add AutoTMM condition and action #1698: Adds AutoManagement action/condition to core models/services — related to validating AutoManagement.Condition.

Poem

🐰 I nibble code beneath the moonlit span,
I found AutoManagement within the plan.
I check the fields and compile each regex tight,
Hop through tests by day and fix by night.
Automations hum — a rabbit's quiet delight.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 1 | ❌ 2

❌ Failed checks (2 warnings)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title check	⚠️ Warning	The title mentions 'AutoTMM' but the actual changes use 'AutoManagement' terminology. The changes are about adding validation support for AutoManagement/AutoTMM conditions, making the title partially accurate but not fully descriptive of the scope.	Update title to 'fix(automations): add AutoManagement to condition validation' for accuracy and consistency with the codebase terminology used in the implementation.
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 28.57% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (1 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch fix/automations-autotmm-validation

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)

internal/api/handlers/automations_validation_test.go (2)

421-464: Strengthen conditionTreesForValidation assertions beyond count.

As written, this can pass even if the returned tree is wrong or nil. Consider asserting the included tree is non-nil and matches the expected condition field in the inclusion cases.

✅ Suggested test hardening

 func TestConditionTreesForValidation_AutoManagement(t *testing.T) {
 	tests := []struct {
 		name       string
 		conditions *models.ActionConditions
 		wantCount  int
 	}{
@@
 	for _, tt := range tests {
 		t.Run(tt.name, func(t *testing.T) {
 			trees := conditionTreesForValidation(tt.conditions)
 			if len(trees) != tt.wantCount {
 				t.Errorf("conditionTreesForValidation() returned %d trees, want %d", len(trees), tt.wantCount)
 			}
+			if tt.wantCount == 1 {
+				if trees[0] == nil {
+					t.Fatalf("conditionTreesForValidation() returned nil tree")
+				}
+				if trees[0].Field != automations.FieldSize {
+					t.Fatalf("conditionTreesForValidation() tree field = %v, want %v", trees[0].Field, automations.FieldSize)
+				}
+			}
 		})
 	}
 }

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@internal/api/handlers/automations_validation_test.go` around lines 421 - 464,
The test should assert more than just the number of trees: after calling
conditionTreesForValidation(tt.conditions) check that for inclusion cases the
returned tree is non-nil (e.g. trees[0] != nil) and that the tree contains the
expected rule/condition field (assert trees[0].Rule.Condition.Field ==
automations.FieldSize or equivalent) and for the exclusion case ensure no trees
are returned; update the TestConditionTreesForValidation_AutoManagement subtests
to perform these non-nil and field-equality checks against AutoManagementAction
and automations.RuleCondition instead of relying solely on len(trees).

---

466-524: Assert AutoManagement regex error path, not only error count.

Counting errors is good, but it won’t catch regressions where errors are attached to the wrong JSON pointer (e.g., not /conditions/autoManagement/condition).

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@internal/api/handlers/automations_validation_test.go` around lines 466 - 524,
The test TestCollectConditionRegexErrors_AutoManagement only asserts the count
of errors from collectConditionRegexErrors; update each subtest to also assert
that when wantErrs>0 the returned error includes the correct JSON pointer
"/conditions/autoManagement/condition" (and for valid cases ensure no error
contains that pointer), and when matching invalid regex verify the error message
mentions the regex parse error; locate references to collectConditionRegexErrors
and the test name to add assertions that scan errs for an entry whose JSON
pointer equals "/conditions/autoManagement/condition" and that its message
contains the regex error text (or that no such entry exists for valid inputs).

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Nitpick comments:
In `@internal/api/handlers/automations_validation_test.go`:
- Around line 421-464: The test should assert more than just the number of
trees: after calling conditionTreesForValidation(tt.conditions) check that for
inclusion cases the returned tree is non-nil (e.g. trees[0] != nil) and that the
tree contains the expected rule/condition field (assert
trees[0].Rule.Condition.Field == automations.FieldSize or equivalent) and for
the exclusion case ensure no trees are returned; update the
TestConditionTreesForValidation_AutoManagement subtests to perform these non-nil
and field-equality checks against AutoManagementAction and
automations.RuleCondition instead of relying solely on len(trees).
- Around line 466-524: The test TestCollectConditionRegexErrors_AutoManagement
only asserts the count of errors from collectConditionRegexErrors; update each
subtest to also assert that when wantErrs>0 the returned error includes the
correct JSON pointer "/conditions/autoManagement/condition" (and for valid cases
ensure no error contains that pointer), and when matching invalid regex verify
the error message mentions the regex parse error; locate references to
collectConditionRegexErrors and the test name to add assertions that scan errs
for an entry whose JSON pointer equals "/conditions/autoManagement/condition"
and that its message contains the regex error text (or that no such entry exists
for valid inputs).

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 9b724935-1584-4467-b87b-add2dd6549a2

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e38d415 and 24ec3c0.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• internal/api/handlers/automations_validation_test.go