fix: gemini api #147
fix: gemini api #147
Conversation
WalkthroughThis update refactors the structure for handling responses from the Gemini API and adjusts the insights modal’s styling. The Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Client
participant API_Route
participant GeminiAPI
Client->>API_Route: POST request to Gemini Flash endpoint
API_Route->>GeminiAPI: Forward request to Gemini API
GeminiAPI-->>API_Route: Returns response with candidates -> content -> parts
API_Route->>API_Route: Extract analysis text using optional chaining
API_Route->>Client: Respond with analysis text or "No analysis available" if undefined
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
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 (1)
frontend/src/app/api/gemini-flash/route.ts (1)
163-165: Consider enhancing error handling with more specific fallback messages.While the optional chaining is good, consider providing more informative fallback messages based on which part of the response is missing.
-const analysis = - data.candidates?.[0]?.content?.parts?.[0]?.text || - "No analysis available."; +const analysis = (() => { + if (!data.candidates?.length) return "No response generated. Please try again."; + if (!data.candidates[0]?.content?.parts?.length) return "Invalid response format. Please try again."; + return data.candidates[0].content.parts[0]?.text || "Analysis text is empty. Please try again."; +})();
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
frontend/src/app/api/gemini-flash/route.ts(5 hunks)frontend/src/app/insights/page.tsx(3 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (5)
- GitHub Check: Redirect rules - lucent-florentine-971919
- GitHub Check: Header rules - lucent-florentine-971919
- GitHub Check: Pages changed - lucent-florentine-971919
- GitHub Check: Bundle Analysis
- GitHub Check: Code Quality & Build
🔇 Additional comments (4)
frontend/src/app/api/gemini-flash/route.ts (2)
14-22: LGTM! Interface aligns with Gemini API response structure.The updated
GeminiResponseCandidateinterface correctly reflects Gemini's response format with nested content and parts array.
90-129: LGTM! Improved prompt template with clear structure and requirements.The updated prompt template provides better guidance for generating structured and accessible responses, with clear sections and formatting requirements.
frontend/src/app/insights/page.tsx (2)
454-462: LGTM! Enhanced modal styling with improved visual hierarchy.The updated modal styling with grid pattern, gradients, and adjusted width creates a more polished and consistent look.
502-512: LGTM! Improved Pro upgrade section with better readability and emphasis.The updated text color, spacing, and button styling make the Pro upgrade section more engaging and easier to read.
This PR does the following:
More styling fixes are necessary, but the app can be deployed as of now.
Summary by CodeRabbit