Conversation
|
Caution Review failedThe pull request is closed. WalkthroughThis update integrates ERC20 token support into the Jobs contract, introducing token-based escrow for job budgets and payments. It adds a mock ERC20 token contract (MockUSDC), updates the Jobs contract and its interface to manage token transfers, and enhances tests to verify token interactions during job creation and approval. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant JobsContract
participant ERC20Token
User->>ERC20Token: approve(JobsContract, amount)
User->>JobsContract: create_job(token, budget=amount)
JobsContract->>ERC20Token: transfer_from(User, JobsContract, amount)
ERC20Token-->>JobsContract: transfer success
Note over JobsContract: Job budget escrowed in tokens
participant Applicant
Applicant->>JobsContract: apply_for_job()
User->>JobsContract: approve_submission(token, job_id, applicant_id)
JobsContract->>ERC20Token: transfer(Applicant, amount)
ERC20Token-->>JobsContract: transfer success
Assessment against linked issues
Assessment against linked issues: Out-of-scope changes
Suggested reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
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. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed 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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 6
🔭 Outside diff range comments (4)
src/contracts/Jobs.cairo (1)
221-237:⚠️ Potential issueCritical: Add refund mechanism for cancelled jobs.
The
cancel_jobfunction doesn't refund the escrowed budget back to the job owner. This could result in funds being permanently locked in the contract.fn cancel_job(ref self: ContractState, job_id: u256, applicant_id: u256) { let caller = get_caller_address(); let mut job = self.get_job(job_id); let mut applicant = self.job_applicants.read((job_id, applicant_id)); assert(job.owner == caller, 'Not your job'); applicant.application_status = ApplicationStatus::JobCancelled; job.status = Status::Cancelled; + + // Refund the job budget to the owner + let success = self.pay_applicant(job.owner, job.budget); + assert(success, 'Refund failed'); self.job_applicants.write((job_id, applicant_id), applicant);tests/test_contract.cairo (3)
285-290:⚠️ Potential issueFix incorrect cheat caller usage.
The
stop_cheat_caller_addressis called beforeapply_for_job, but the cheat should be active during the function call.cheat_caller_address(contract_address, applicant1, CheatSpan::Indefinite); - stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address); - let _applicant1 = dispatcher.apply_for_job(job_id, qualification.clone()); + + stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address);
371-376:⚠️ Potential issueFix incorrect cheat caller usage pattern.
Similar to the previous issue, the cheat should be active during the function call.
cheat_caller_address(contract_address, applicant1, CheatSpan::Indefinite); - stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address); - let _applicant1 = dispatcher.apply_for_job(job_id, qualification.clone()); + + stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address);
461-466: 💡 Verification agent🧩 Analysis chain
Fix multiple instances of incorrect cheat caller usage.
There are several more instances of the same pattern where
stop_cheat_caller_addressis called before the function that needs the cheat.Run the following script to find all instances of this pattern:
Also applies to: 545-550
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find all instances where stop_cheat_caller_address is called before apply_for_job # Search for the pattern where stop_cheat_caller_address appears before apply_for_job rg -B 5 -A 5 "stop_cheat_caller_address.*\n\s*let.*apply_for_job" tests/test_contract.cairoLength of output: 285
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Improved script: for each stop_cheat_caller_address, check the next 5 lines for apply_for_job grep -n "stop_cheat_caller_address" tests/test_contract.cairo | cut -d: -f1 | while read -r start; do end=$((start + 5)) snippet=$(sed -n "${start},${end}p" tests/test_contract.cairo) if echo "$snippet" | grep -q "apply_for_job"; then echo "Found pattern at lines ${start}-${end}:" echo "$snippet" echo fi doneLength of output: 30921
Incorrect cheat context around
apply_for_jobcallsSeveral tests in
tests/test_contract.cairocallstop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address); let _applicant = dispatcher.apply_for_job(...); stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address);without first entering a cheat context, so the call runs under the default caller. Please wrap each
apply_for_jobin acheat_caller_address(...)and only then stop the cheat.Instances to fix:
- tests/test_contract.cairo: lines 287–292
- tests/test_contract.cairo: lines 373–378
- tests/test_contract.cairo: lines 463–468
- tests/test_contract.cairo: lines 547–552
Example correction:
- stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address); - let _applicant1 = dispatcher.apply_for_job(job_id, qualification.clone()); - stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address); + cheat_caller_address(contract_address, applicant1, CheatSpan::Indefinite); + let _applicant1 = dispatcher.apply_for_job(job_id, qualification.clone()); + stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address);
🧹 Nitpick comments (6)
src/interfaces/IJobs.cairo (1)
16-18: Consider clarifying the deposit function signature.The
depositfunction signature might be clearer if it explicitly indicated the flow of funds. Consider renaming parameters or adding documentation to clarify that this deposits tokens FROM the depositor TO the contract.src/contracts/Jobs.cairo (2)
200-220: Missing milestone-based payment functionality.The PR objectives mention "milestone-based payouts", but the current implementation only supports a single payment upon job approval. Consider implementing milestone tracking and partial payment functionality to align with the stated objectives.
Would you like me to help design the milestone payment structure or open an issue to track this feature?
88-91: Missing multi-token support functionality.The PR objectives mention "multi-token support", but the current implementation only supports a single token set during contract construction. Consider implementing a mechanism to support multiple payment tokens per job.
src/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo (1)
47-51: Consider making token initialization more flexible.The constructor hard-codes the token name and symbol as "USDC". For a mock token used in testing, it might be beneficial to make these configurable.
Consider accepting name and symbol as constructor parameters:
- fn constructor(ref self: ContractState, recipient: ContractAddress, owner: ContractAddress) { - self.erc20.initializer(format!("USDC"), format!("USDC")); + fn constructor(ref self: ContractState, recipient: ContractAddress, owner: ContractAddress, name: ByteArray, symbol: ByteArray) { + self.erc20.initializer(name, symbol); self.ownable.initializer(owner); self.custom_decimals.write(8); }tests/test_contract.cairo (2)
33-33: Pass token name and symbol as constructor parameters.If the MockUSDC constructor is updated to accept name and symbol parameters (as suggested in the previous review), this line should be updated accordingly.
- let (contract_address, _) = contract_class.deploy(@array![owner.into(), owner.into()]).unwrap(); + let (contract_address, _) = contract_class.deploy(@array![owner.into(), owner.into(), format!("USDC").into(), format!("USDC").into()]).unwrap();
78-79: Simplify the balance assertion.The parentheses around the subtraction are unnecessary.
- let balanceafter = token_dispatcher.balance_of(user); - assert(balanceafter == (balanceb4 - budget), 'balance error'); + let balance_after = token_dispatcher.balance_of(user); + assert(balance_after == balanceb4 - budget, 'balance error');
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
src/contracts/Jobs.cairo(6 hunks)src/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo(1 hunks)src/interfaces/IJobs.cairo(1 hunks)src/lib.cairo(1 hunks)tests/test_contract.cairo(11 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
src/lib.cairo (1)
3-3: LGTM!Clean addition of the MockUSDC module declaration.
src/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo (2)
77-112: External implementation delegates correctly to ERC20 component.The implementation correctly delegates all calls to the underlying ERC20 component methods. Once the interface method names are fixed, the implementation method names should be updated accordingly.
Note: After fixing the interface method names, ensure to update the implementation method names to match.
34-34:⚠️ Potential issueAdd missing semicolon after the storage field.
Apply this diff to fix the syntax:
- custom_decimals: u8 // Add custom decimals storage + custom_decimals: u8, // Add custom decimals storageLikely an incorrect or invalid review comment.
tests/test_contract.cairo (1)
401-402: Verify the applicant receives the full budget amount.Good test coverage! The test correctly verifies that the applicant receives the full budget amount after job approval.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
tests/test_contract.cairo (1)
385-387: Check for duplicate assertion issue resolution.Based on past review comments, there was a duplicate balance assertion issue. The current code shows only one balance assertion, indicating the issue was resolved.
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
src/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo (1)
37-42: Consider more realistic initialization parameters.The constructor hardcodes "USDC" for both name and symbol, and sets decimals to 8. While functional for testing, consider making these configurable.
#[constructor] -fn constructor(ref self: ContractState, recipient: ContractAddress, owner: ContractAddress) { - self.erc20.initializer(format!("USDC"), format!("USDC")); +fn constructor(ref self: ContractState, name: ByteArray, symbol: ByteArray, decimals: u8, owner: ContractAddress) { + self.erc20.initializer(name, symbol); self.ownable.initializer(owner); - self.custom_decimals.write(8); + self.custom_decimals.write(decimals); }tests/test_contract.cairo (2)
29-36: Consider parameterizing the ERC20 deployment.The
deploy_erc20function hardcodes the owner address. Consider making it more flexible for different test scenarios.-fn deploy_erc20() -> IExternalDispatcher { - let owner: ContractAddress = contract_address_const::<'owner'>(); +fn deploy_erc20(owner: ContractAddress) -> IExternalDispatcher { let contract_class = declare("MockUsdc").unwrap().contract_class(); let (contract_address, _) = contract_class.deploy(@array![owner.into(), owner.into()]).unwrap(); IExternalDispatcher { contract_address } }
51-68: Improve caller address management pattern.The test properly uses the start/stop cheat caller address pattern, but the logic could be cleaner. The token minting should happen under the owner's context consistently.
- let sender: ContractAddress = contract_address_const::<'owner'>(); - start_cheat_caller_address(contract_address, sender); + let owner: ContractAddress = contract_address_const::<'owner'>(); + start_cheat_caller_address(erc20_address, owner); - let token_dispatcher = IERC20Dispatcher { contract_address: erc20_address }; - let token_idispatcher = IExternalDispatcher { contract_address: erc20_address }; + let token_dispatcher = IERC20Dispatcher { contract_address: erc20_address }; + let token_idispatcher = IExternalDispatcher { contract_address: erc20_address }; token_idispatcher.mint(user, 20000); - stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address); + stop_cheat_caller_address(erc20_address);
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
src/contracts/Jobs.cairo(7 hunks)src/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo(1 hunks)src/interfaces/IJobs.cairo(2 hunks)tests/test_contract.cairo(8 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/interfaces/IJobs.cairo
- src/contracts/Jobs.cairo
🔇 Additional comments (7)
src/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo (2)
4-7: LGTM! Clean interface definition.The
IExternaltrait provides a clear interface for minting functionality. The method signature is appropriate for a mock token contract.
16-26:Details
❓ Verification inconclusive
Verify component storage configuration.
The storage structure correctly integrates OpenZeppelin components. However, the custom decimals storage might introduce unnecessary complexity.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check if OpenZeppelin ERC20 already provides decimal customization # Expected: Find standard decimal configuration options in OpenZeppelin docs rg -A 5 -B 5 "decimals.*storage" --type cairo || rg -A 5 -B 5 "decimal.*custom" --type cairoLength of output: 153
Let's search across all
.cairofiles for any mention of “decimal” to see if the ERC20Component storage already contains a decimals field:
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Search all Cairo files for any 'decimal' occurrences rg -n "decimal" -g "*.cairo"Length of output: 367
Confirm ERC20Component’s decimals handling
I didn’t find any built-in
decimalsstorage or configuration in the local Cairo contracts forERC20Component. Before keepingcustom_decimals, please:
- Review the OpenZeppelin Cairo ERC20Component implementation (outside this repo) to see if it already exposes or hardcodes a decimals value.
- If it does, remove the duplicate
custom_decimalsfield anddecimals()override.- Otherwise, ensure your custom storage is initialized and used consistently without conflicting with the component’s logic.
Locations to check:
- src/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo:
custom_decimals: u8definition (line 25)- src/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo:
fn decimals(...)override (lines 54–57)tests/test_contract.cairo (5)
12-27: LGTM! Improved setup function architecture.The updated setup function properly deploys both contracts and returns their addresses for use in tests. The separation of concerns with
deploy_erc20helper function improves maintainability.
80-82: LGTM! Proper balance verification.The test correctly verifies that the user's token balance decreases by the budget amount after job creation, confirming the escrow functionality works as expected.
425-427: LGTM! Proper payment verification.The test correctly verifies that the applicant receives the budget amount upon approval, confirming the payment functionality works as expected.
73-76:Details
✅ Verification successful
Verify token parameter integration.
The
create_jobmethod now includes theerc20_addressparameter, which is good for the escrow functionality. Ensure this aligns with the actual contract interface.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that the Jobs contract create_job method signature matches the test calls # Expected: Find create_job method with token address parameter ast-grep --pattern $'fn create_job($$$, token: ContractAddress, $$$)' || rg -A 10 "fn create_job" --type cairoLength of output: 70
To locate the
create_jobdefinition and confirm its parameters, let’s search all Cairo files for its signature:
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the create_job function definition in all .cairo files rg -n "fn create_job" -g "*.cairo" -A3Length of output: 504
create_job signature matches contract interface
The
create_jobfunction in bothsrc/interfaces/IJobs.cairoandsrc/contracts/Jobs.cairoalready declarestoken: ContractAddressas its second parameter, so the test call intests/test_contract.cairocorrectly passeserc20_address. No further changes are needed.
418-418:Details
✅ Verification successful
Verify approve_submission method signature.
The
approve_submissionmethod now takes anerc20_addressparameter. Ensure this matches the contract implementation.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify approve_submission method signature in Jobs contract # Expected: Find method with token address parameter ast-grep --pattern $'fn approve_submission($$$, token: ContractAddress, $$$)' || rg -A 5 "fn approve_submission" --type cairoLength of output: 78
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Search for approve_submission definition and its usage in all Cairo files echo "Looking for function declaration:" rg --color=never -n "fn approve_submission" -g '*.cairo' -A5 echo -e "\nLooking for any calls to approve_submission in contract code:" rg --color=never -n "approve_submission(" -g '*.cairo' -n -A5Length of output: 1478
approve_submission signature verified
The
approve_submissionmethod is defined as:fn approve_submission( ref self: ContractState, token: ContractAddress, job_id: u256, applicant_id: u256, ) { … }and the test call
dispatcher.approve_submission(erc20_address, job_id, applicant0);correctly passes
erc20_addressas thetokenparameter, followed byjob_idandapplicant_id. No changes are needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
tests/test_contract.cairo (1)
40-98: Well-structured token integration test with minor caller address issue.The test comprehensively covers token minting, approval, job creation, and balance verification. However, there's a redundant
stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address)call on line 67 that doesn't match a correspondingstart_cheat_caller_address.Apply this fix to remove the redundant stop call:
- stop_cheat_caller_address(contract_address); + stop_cheat_caller_address(erc20_address);
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
src/contracts/Jobs.cairo(9 hunks)src/interfaces/IJobs.cairo(2 hunks)tests/test_contract.cairo(8 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/interfaces/IJobs.cairo
- src/contracts/Jobs.cairo
🔇 Additional comments (6)
tests/test_contract.cairo (6)
1-9: LGTM: Import statements are well-structured for token integration.The imports correctly include all necessary components for ERC20 token testing, including dispatchers, cheat functions, and the MockUSDC interface.
12-27: LGTM: Setup function properly updated for dual contract deployment.The function correctly returns both the Jobs contract address and ERC20 contract address, which is necessary for the token-integrated tests.
157-495: Comprehensive test coverage for job lifecycle with proper token integration.The test suite excellently covers the complete job workflow including assignment, submission, and approval with proper token transfer verification. The
test_approve_jobcorrectly verifies that the applicant receives the budget tokens upon approval.
477-491: Correct escrow release implementation.The test properly simulates the escrow release mechanism where tokens are transferred from the contract's escrow to the successful applicant upon job approval.
497-678: Appropriate handling of rejection and change request scenarios.The tests correctly implement scenarios where tokens remain in escrow during rejection and change requests, which maintains the security of the escrow system.
29-36:Details
❌ Incorrect review comment
Verify contract name and constructor parameters.
The function declares "MockUsdc" but the import uses "MockUSDC". Ensure the contract name consistency. Also verify that the MockUSDC constructor expects two identical owner parameters.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify MockUSDC contract name and constructor signature # Search for MockUSDC contract definition rg -A 10 -B 5 "contract MockU[sS][dD][cC]" # Look for constructor implementation ast-grep --pattern 'fn constructor($$$) { $$$ }'Length of output: 97
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Search for any Cairo files referencing MockUsdc or MockUSDC rg -n "MockUsdc" -g '*.cairo' rg -n "MockUSDC" -g '*.cairo' # List files containing either spelling rg -l -g '*.cairo' "MockUsdc|MockUSDC" # Search for constructor definitions in all .cairo files rg -n "#\\[constructor\\]" -g '*.cairo' rg -n "fn constructor" -g '*.cairo'Length of output: 739
Ignore naming and parameter concerns.
- The
declare("MockUsdc")call matches the inner module name (pub mod MockUsdc) insrc/contracts/MockUSDC.cairo.- The constructor signature is
fn constructor(..., recipient: ContractAddress, owner: ContractAddress). Passingowner.into()twice simply uses the same address for both roles, which is valid for this test.No changes are required.
Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.
2 participants
This PR introduces a secure and flexible escrow system to manage job payments on the platform. It enables automatic escrow funding upon job acceptance and supports milestone-based payouts, multi-token support, dispute resolution, and refund handling, all with strong security guarantees. closes #30
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Tests