b768441c13aed1c978522f59d2cc326f3bd5a708
5 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Félix Malfait
|
a682c8fa62 |
feat(sdk): declare row-level permission predicates in the role manifest (#21919)
## Why Apps can declare object and field permissions on a role via `defineRole`, but **not row-level security**. The RLS engine and the metadata-sync machinery already support predicates fully — they're first-class universal flat entities, the `FlatRole` already carries `rowLevelPermissionPredicateUniversalIdentifiers`, and the workspace-migration layer has builders/validators/handlers for them. The only gap was the **manifest layer**: `RoleManifest` had no field for predicates, so the sync converter always left them empty. As a result, the only way to ship RLS with an app was a post-install script that pushed predicates through the `upsertRowLevelPermissionPredicates` mutation. That mutation assigns predicates to the workspace's **generic custom application**, not the app that owns the role — so a single role's definition ends up split across two applications and drifts on every upgrade (you have to remember to re-run the script). The Partner app does exactly this today via `configure-partner-rls.ts`. ## What Adds `rowLevelPermissionPredicates` and `rowLevelPermissionPredicateGroups` to `RoleManifest` / `RoleConfig`, mirroring how `objectPermissions` / `fieldPermissions` already flow end-to-end: - **twenty-shared** — predicate + predicate-group manifest types on `RoleManifest` (referencing objects/fields by `universalIdentifier`, operand/logical-operator from the existing GraphQL enums). - **twenty-sdk** — `defineRole` accepts and validates them; the build derives deterministic predicate `universalIdentifier`s (groups keep an explicit one so predicates can reference them). - **twenty-server** — two converters turn manifest predicates/groups into universal flat entities during application-manifest sync, so they are created/updated/deleted together with the role and **owned by the app that ships it**. ### Bug fix found along the way The migration build order ran the `rowLevelPermissionPredicate(Group)` builders **before** the `role` builder, so a predicate declared alongside a brand-new role failed validation with `ROLE_NOT_FOUND`. They now run **after** the role builder, exactly like object/field permissions. ## Partner app (second commit) Converts `partner.role.ts` to declare its five predicates inline and **deletes `configure-partner-rls.ts`** + the `rls:configure` scripts — the workaround this PR is meant to retire. The predicates are byte-for-byte the same semantics as the script produced. > Live-deployment note: the existing script-created predicates are owned by the *custom* application, so the Partner app sync won't touch them. Clear them once (e.g. an empty upsert on the Partner role) around deploy to avoid duplicates. Kept as a **separate commit** so it can be split out if reviewers prefer. ## Testing - **Integration (full app):** new `successful-manifest-sync-row-level-permission-predicate.integration-spec.ts` — installs an app whose role declares a predicate and asserts the predicate row is created (and **owned by the app**, not the custom app), updated in place on re-sync, removed when dropped from the manifest, and removed on uninstall. Ran locally against a seeded test DB ✅. - Re-ran the existing cross-app permission + view-field manifest suites to confirm the build-order change doesn't regress object/field-permission sync (13/13 ✅). - **Unit (utils only):** `defineRole` validation and `fromRoleConfigToRoleManifest` deterministic-id derivation. - Docs: new "Row-level security" section in `apps/config/roles.mdx`. ## Scope notes / possible follow-ups - Surfacing RLS in the app-install permission summary UI was intentionally left out (predicates *restrict* rather than grant, and typically live on a non-default role) — easy follow-up if wanted. - The `upsertRowLevelPermissionPredicates` mutation still homes out-of-band predicates on the custom app for app-owned roles; making that consistent (or rejecting it, like field permissions already do) is a sensible follow-up. https://claude.ai/code/session_01MipAis9z9okd4oCm9HCKEf --- _Generated by [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code/session_01MipAis9z9okd4oCm9HCKEf)_ <!-- This is an auto-generated description by cubic. --> <a href="https://cubic.dev/pr/twentyhq/twenty/pull/21919?utm_source=github" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-no-image-dialog="true"><picture><source media="(prefers-color-scheme: dark)" srcset="https://www.cubic.dev/buttons/review-in-cubic-dark.svg"><source media="(prefers-color-scheme: light)" srcset="https://www.cubic.dev/buttons/review-in-cubic-light.svg"><img alt="Review in cubic" src="https://www.cubic.dev/buttons/review-in-cubic-dark.svg"></picture></a> <!-- End of auto-generated description by cubic. --> |
||
|
martmull
|
c2ca90c255 |
feat(sdk): add runAgent() to run app agents from logic functions (#21157)
<img width="948" height="593" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d990fa98-3cfd-469d-ab7f-0b2d4ccf3afc" /> <img width="1361" height="802" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1091f598-49f3-4c16-92ea-1e1c200181e2" /> ## Add `runAgent()` to the Logic Function SDK Lets an app's logic function run one of its own AI agents server-side and get the result back synchronously — reusing the existing agent executor instead of a new bespoke transport. ### Backend - New **`runAgent` GraphQL mutation** (metadata schema) in `ai-agent-execution`, wrapping the existing `AgentAsyncExecutorService.executeAgent`. Scopes the agent lookup to the calling application and runs it under an application auth context. - New `@AuthApplication()` param decorator (mirrors `@AuthWorkspace()`) — first GraphQL resolver authenticated by an **application access token**. - Guarded by `WorkspaceAuthGuard` + `SettingsPermissionGuard(PermissionFlagType.AI)`: the app's role must grant the `AI` permission flag. ### SDK - `runAgent({ agentUniversalIdentifier, prompt })` posts the mutation to `/metadata` with the app token via a new runtime GraphQL transport. Returns `{ result, hasNoMoreAvailableCredits }`. - Refactored the connections helpers onto a shared `postAppEndpoint` util (removes duplicated transport logic). ### Frontend - App install permission modal now shows an explicit consent line — _"Run AI agents and bill AI credits to your workspace"_ — when the app's role requests the `AI` flag. ### Docs - Documented `runAgent` and its `AI` permission-flag requirement in _Skills & Agents_. - Fixed outdated role-permission examples in _Roles & Permissions_ (`permissionFlags` → `permissionFlagUniversalIdentifiers`, `PermissionFlag` → `SystemPermissionFlag`). ### Test plan - [x] SDK unit tests (`run-agent.spec.ts`) — request shape, GraphQL/HTTP error handling, missing env vars - [x] `twenty-server`, `twenty-front`, `twenty-shared` typecheck + lint - [ ] Manual: install an app granting the `AI` flag, call `runAgent()` from a logic function, confirm the agent runs and credits are billed --------- Co-authored-by: cubic-dev-ai[bot] <191113872+cubic-dev-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
nitin
|
db0547f503 |
[1/3] Rename permissionFlag to rolePermissionFlag + add permissionFlag catalog/backfill (#20481)
Split of #20377. ## Summary This PR separates available permission flags from per-role permission flag grants. Previously, `core.permissionFlag` stored the role assignment directly: `roleId + flag`. This PR renames that legacy grant table to `core.rolePermissionFlag`, then recreates `core.permissionFlag` as the catalog of available permission flags. ## What changed - Rename the existing `core.permissionFlag` grant table to `core.rolePermissionFlag`. - Add the new syncable `core.permissionFlag` catalog entity with key, label, description, icon, permission type, relevance flags, and custom/standard metadata. - Add stable `SystemPermissionFlag` universal identifiers for the built-in `PermissionFlagType` values. - Seed the standard permission flags for every workspace under the Twenty standard application. - Backfill existing role grants: - create missing catalog rows for existing grant keys, - add `rolePermissionFlag.permissionFlagId`, - migrate grants from the old string `flag` column to the new catalog FK, - replace the old `(flag, roleId)` uniqueness with `(permissionFlagId, roleId)`. - Rewire role permission flag caches, permission checks, role DTO mapping, and `upsertPermissionFlags` to resolve through the catalog. - Keep the existing public role permission API shape: product/app surfaces still talk about `permissionFlags` and return `{ id, roleId, flag }`. - Update metadata flat-entity machinery, migration builders, validators, action handlers, snapshots, generated schemas, docs, and app fixtures for the new `permissionFlag` / `rolePermissionFlag` split. ## Behavior after this PR - Existing permission flag grants keep working. - Existing GraphQL role permission flows keep the same public naming. - Standard permission flags are represented as catalog rows. - Permission checks now compare grants through catalog universal identifiers instead of the legacy `flag` column. - Workspace deletion cleanup now verifies both `permissionFlag` and `rolePermissionFlag`. ## What is not in this PR - Public GraphQL CRUD for custom permission flags. - App manifest support for declaring new custom permission flags. - Frontend UI for creating or assigning custom permission flags beyond the existing role permission flow. --------- Co-authored-by: Weiko <corentin@twenty.com> |
||
|
Abdul Rahman
|
4aca4d1143 |
Add defineApplicationRole method (#20314)
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com> |
||
|
Jonathan Bredo
|
2eae25dc34 |
Improved create-twenty-app documentation for AI coding agents (#20325)
Added a bit of enhanced context for better agentic coding, based on this [Discord conversation](https://discord.com/channels/1130383047699738754/1130383048173682821/1501538550301331477). --------- Co-authored-by: Félix Malfait <felix@twenty.com> Co-authored-by: Félix Malfait <felix.malfait@gmail.com> |
