[Validation] moved fields pydantic to validation

[AmitJ98]

• fixed + removed unnecessary pydantic validation
• changed pydantic validation to match the backend validations
• created a strict validation for integration fields
• updated pyproject.toml

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @AmitJ98, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request significantly refactors the data validation strategy for integration fields by centralizing validation logic into a new module, moving away from scattered Pydantic regex patterns. This change aims to align frontend validation more closely with backend requirements, enhance data integrity, and streamline future validation efforts. It also includes minor adjustments to data model field definitions and updates to project dependencies.

Highlights

• Refactored Pydantic Validations: Removed direct regex pattern validations from Pydantic Field definitions across various data models (e.g., ActionParameter, ConnectorParameter, IntegrationMetadata, JobMetadata, JobParameter). These validations are now handled by a new, centralized module.
• Introduced Strict Fields Validation: A new FieldsValidation module has been added to centralize and enforce strict naming conventions for integration components (actions, connectors, jobs) and their parameters, using dedicated regex patterns (METADATA_REGEX and PARAM_REGEX). This ensures consistency with backend validation requirements.
• Updated Constants and Max Lengths: The LONG_DESCRIPTION_MAX_LENGTH constant was adjusted, and a new MAX_SCRIPT_RESULT_NAME_LENGTH constant was introduced. The script_result_name field in ActionMetadata now utilizes this new constant for Pydantic max_length validation.
• Improved Type Consistency: Modified object construction logic for several fields (e.g., is_async, description) to explicitly default to False or an empty string, preventing potential None values and ensuring type consistency during data model instantiation from built data.
• Dependency and Version Updates: The project version in pyproject.toml and uv.lock has been bumped from 1.25.6 to 1.25.7. Additionally, the ty dependency in uv.lock was updated from 0.0.12 to 0.0.13.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[github-actions]

❌ Marketplace Validation Failed

Click to view the full report

---

Validation Report

🧩 Integrations

Pre-Build Stage

flashpoint

Validation Name	Details
⚠️ Fields Validation	Action name: IOC_Enrichment does not match the regex: ^[a-zA-Z0-9-\s]+$

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request refactors Pydantic validations for integration fields, moving some regex-based validations from Pydantic fields to a new FieldsValidation class. It also updates package versions and adjusts constant values. The changes aim to centralize and standardize validation logic. However, there are a few areas for improvement, including redundant code, an incorrect docstring, and a logical flaw in the new validation class that could lead to incomplete validation.

[AmitJ98]

/gemini review

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

The pull request introduces a new FieldsValidation class to centralize regex-based validation for integration fields, moving this logic out of the Pydantic models. This improves modularity and consistency in validation. The PR also includes a version bump for the mp package and updates a dependency. There are a few instances of redundant or False and or "" in assignments that can be simplified, and a minor inconsistency in regex usage within the new validation file.