feat/fix: replaced DeepSeek with Gemini-Flash API #141
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes remove an existing API endpoint and introduce a new one. The deleted endpoint was responsible for processing POST requests with ideological scores, validating inputs, constructing a prompt, and calling an external DeepSeek API. The new endpoint, now located in a different path, processes similar POST requests but interacts with the Gemini API. It includes TypeScript interfaces for structured data, retrieves an API key from environment variables, and implements detailed validation, prompt construction, and error handling. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Client
participant APIServer as Gemini API Endpoint
participant GeminiAPI as Gemini API
Client->>APIServer: POST ideological scores
APIServer->>APIServer: Validate JSON payload and construct prompt
APIServer->>GeminiAPI: POST prompt and API key
GeminiAPI-->>APIServer: Return analysis result
APIServer->>Client: Respond with analysis data
Poem
✨ Finishing Touches
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
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
✅ Deploy Preview for lucent-florentine-971919 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: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
frontend/src/app/api/gemini-flash/route.ts (3)
33-38: Consider returning field-specific error messages
When multiple fields are missing, returning a single error can obscure which fields need correction. Returning a structured error detailing each missing or invalid field could improve user feedback.
51-91: Extract the prompt into a separate, well-labeled file or utility
Storing this lengthy prompt in a separate file or dedicated helper function would boost maintainability, making it easier to update the prompt text without editing core logic.
132-139: Add unit tests for success and error scenarios
Consider adding tests that mock the Gemini API and validate the response handling logic. This will help ensure robust coverage of both happy and failure paths.Do you want me to generate a sample unit test to illustrate this approach?
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
frontend/src/app/api/deepseek/route.ts(0 hunks)frontend/src/app/api/gemini-flash/route.ts(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- frontend/src/app/api/deepseek/route.ts
🔇 Additional comments (2)
frontend/src/app/api/gemini-flash/route.ts (2)
4-9: Good use of strongly typed interface for ideology scores
The interface explicitly defines the required numeric fields, promoting clarity regarding the expected input structure.
94-96: Verify environment variable consistency
Ensure that GEMINI_API_KEY is properly configured and available in all deployment environments so requests to the Gemini API won’t fail.✅ Verification successful
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify references to GEMINI_API_KEY in the codebase and ensure it is set correctly rg 'GEMINI_API_KEY' printenv | grep GEMINI_API_KEYLength of output: 348
Environment variable usage is consistent in the code
The search confirms that the only reference toGEMINI_API_KEYis in frontend/src/app/api/gemini-flash/route.ts where it’s properly validated. The script output indicates that the code correctly checks for the variable, and the absence of a value in the local test is likely due to the sandbox environment rather than an issue in the code itself. Just ensure that your deployment configurations supply a valid value forGEMINI_API_KEYso that runtime errors are avoided.
PR Description:
Summary by CodeRabbit