Fix order state check before mutating order lines

[ronakmaheshwari]

Description

This PR ensures that the order state is checked and transitioned to 'Modifying' before any order lines are created or mutated via addItemsToOrder.

Breaking changes

This PR only changes internal flow control within OrderService.addItemsToOrder and does not affect external API behavior or existing API consumers.

Screenshots

N/A – this is a backend logic fix and does not affect the UI.

Checklist

📌 Always:

• I have set a clear title
• My PR is small and contains a single feature
• I have checked my own PR

👍 Most of the time:

• I have added or updated test cases
• I have updated the README if needed

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Improved validation to ensure items can only be added to orders in the correct state, with clear error messaging if not allowed.
  • Enhanced handling of custom fields and item quantities when adding items to an order.
  • Ensured the order reflects all latest changes after items are added.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
docs	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Aug 3, 2025 4:23am

[github-actions]

All contributors have signed the CLA ✍️ ✅
_{Posted by the CLA Assistant Lite bot.}

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The addItemsToOrder method in the order service was refactored to enforce the order's state as 'Modifying' before adding items, with an early state check and transition. The method's handling of custom fields and quantity updates was unified and simplified, and interceptor calls were removed. The method now also re-fetches the order after modifications.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Change Summary
Order Service Refactor packages/core/src/service/services/order.service.ts	Refactored addItemsToOrder to enforce 'Modifying' order state, updated custom fields and quantity logic, removed interceptor calls, simplified product enabled check, and ensured the returned order is re-fetched. Method signature updated to use Record<string, any> for custom fields. Minor whitespace change in addItemToOrder.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~15 minutes

Note

⚡️ Unit Test Generation is now available in beta!

Learn more here, or try it out under "Finishing Touches" below.

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 35cfd86 and bcc38c8.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• packages/core/src/service/services/order.service.ts (4 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (6)

packages/core/src/service/services/order.service.ts (6)

610-618: Good implementation of early state validation

The early state check ensures the order is in the 'Modifying' state before any items are added, which aligns with the PR objectives. The logic correctly attempts a state transition if needed and throws a clear error if the transition is not possible.

---

604-604: Type improvement for customFields parameter

Good change from { [key: string]: any } to Record<string, any>. While functionally equivalent, Record is more idiomatic and explicit in TypeScript.

---

691-703: Excellent custom fields merging implementation

The custom fields handling now properly merges new fields with existing ones, preventing accidental data loss. The use of nullish coalescing operator and explicit spreading ensures proper preservation of existing data.

---

705-706: Clean quantity calculation

The simplified quantity calculation using nullish coalescing (?? 0) is more concise and readable than the previous implementation.

---

719-719: Good practice: Re-fetching the order after modifications

Re-fetching the order ensures the returned object reflects all the changes made during the operation, including any side effects from other operations.

---

597-724: Verify interceptor removal mentioned in summary

The AI summary mentions that "interceptor calls were removed" and specifically that the orderInterceptors check and invocation for willAddItemToOrder were removed. However, I don't see any removed interceptor code in the provided diff. This could indicate either an incomplete diff or an inaccurate summary.

Please verify whether interceptor-related code was actually removed from this method. If so, ensure all interceptor removals are intentional and won't break existing functionality that depends on order interceptors.

Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Explain this complex logic.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

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)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
• @coderabbitai generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
2 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[ronakmaheshwari]

I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA