Allow attribution tags through go-pinecone (PINECONE_CLI_ATTRIBUTION_TAG)

[austin-denoble]

Problem

We need a mechanism for being able to further tag usage of the CLI.

Solution

• Allow appending attribution tags to network operations from the CLI via the go-pinecone SDK SourceTag.
• Read from PINECONE_CLI_ATTRIBUTION_TAG and append to the existing pinecone-cli source tag.
• Add a small unit test for the function reading from env.

Type of Change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• This change requires a documentation update
• Infrastructure change (CI configs, etc)
• Non-code change (docs, etc)
• None of the above: (explain here)

Test Plan

CI - unit & integration tests

---

• To see the specific tasks where the Asana app for GitHub is being used, see below:
  • https://app.asana.com/0/0/1212534228747360

[claude]

Claude Code is working…

I'll analyze this and get back to you.

View job run

[claude]

Claude finished @austin-denoble's task —— View job

---

PR Review: Allow attribution tags through go-pinecone

I'll review this PR for code quality, best practices, potential bugs, performance considerations, security concerns, and test coverage.

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md) - Not found
• Analyze modified client.go implementation
• Analyze new client_test.go test file
• Evaluate code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs and security concerns
• Assess test coverage adequacy
• Provide comprehensive review feedback

Review Feedback

✅ Overall Assessment

This is a well-implemented, straightforward feature that adds attribution tagging functionality. The implementation is clean, secure, and follows good practices.

Code Quality & Best Practices

✅ Strengths:

• Clean implementation: The cliSourceTag() function (client.go:28-34) is simple, readable, and follows single responsibility principle
• Consistent usage: The function is properly used in all three client creation functions (NewPineconeClientForProjectById, NewClientForAPIKey, NewPineconeAdminClient)
• Good naming: Function and environment variable names are descriptive and follow Go conventions
• Appropriate scope: The function is package-private, which is correct for this internal utility

Security Analysis

✅ No security concerns identified:

• Input validation: The implementation safely handles empty environment variables
• No injection risks: The environment variable value is used as-is in the source tag, which is appropriate for this use case
• Safe concatenation: Uses simple string concatenation with underscore separator

Performance Considerations

✅ Efficient implementation:

• Minimal overhead: os.Getenv() is called once per client creation, which is reasonable
• No memory leaks: Simple string operations with no complex allocations
• Could be optimized (minor): The env var is read on every client creation. For high-frequency client creation scenarios, consider caching the value, but this is likely premature optimization for CLI usage patterns.

Test Coverage

✅ Good test coverage:

• Comprehensive scenarios: Tests both empty and set environment variable cases
• Correct test structure: Uses table-driven approach with subtests
• Proper isolation: Uses t.Setenv() for proper test isolation
• Clear assertions: Test expectations are clear and validate the exact behavior

Suggestions for improvement:

1. Edge case testing: Consider adding a test for environment variables with special characters or very long values
2. Integration testing: The unit tests are good, but integration tests ensuring the source tag reaches the actual SDK calls would be valuable

Potential Issues

⚠️ Minor considerations:

1. Environment variable validation: The code accepts any non-empty string. Consider whether certain characters (spaces, special chars) should be sanitized or validated
2. Documentation: The PINECONE_CLI_ATTRIBUTION_TAG environment variable is not documented in the code. Consider adding a comment explaining its purpose and format

Code-Specific Observations

• Line 33: The underscore separator "_" is a good choice - commonly used and unlikely to conflict
• Lines 101, 121, 146: Consistent usage across all client types ensures attribution works for all API operations
• Test line 15: The expected format CLISourceTag + "_extra" is intuitive and follows common tagging patterns

Recommendations

1. Add documentation comment for the cliSourceTag() function:

   // cliSourceTag returns the CLI source tag, optionally appended with
   // a suffix from PINECONE_CLI_ATTRIBUTION_TAG environment variable
   func cliSourceTag() string {

2. Consider input validation (optional) if specific format requirements exist:

   if suffix != "" && !isValidAttributionTag(suffix) {
       // handle invalid format
   }

Summary

This is a solid implementation that achieves its goal effectively. The code is secure, performant, well-tested, and follows Go best practices. The changes are minimal and focused, which reduces the risk of introducing bugs. The feature will enable better usage tracking for the CLI without impacting existing functionality.

Approval recommendation: ✅ Approve - This PR is ready to merge after addressing the minor documentation suggestion if desired.

---

[claude]

Claude finished @austin-denoble's task —— View job

---

PR Review: Allow attribution tags through go-pinecone

I'll review this PR for code quality, best practices, potential bugs, performance considerations, security concerns, and test coverage.

Todo List:

• Read repository guidelines (CLAUDE.md) - Not found
• Analyze modified client.go implementation
• Analyze new client_test.go test file
• Evaluate code quality and best practices
• Check for potential bugs and security concerns
• Assess test coverage adequacy
• Provide comprehensive review feedback

Review Feedback

✅ Overall Assessment

This is a well-implemented, straightforward feature that adds attribution tagging functionality. The implementation is clean, secure, and follows good practices.

Code Quality & Best Practices

✅ Strengths:

• Clean implementation: The cliSourceTag() function (client.go:249-255) is simple, readable, and follows single responsibility principle
• Consistent usage: The function is properly used in all three client creation functions (NewPineconeClientForProjectById, NewClientForAPIKey, NewPineconeAdminClient)
• Good naming: Function and environment variable names are descriptive and follow Go conventions
• Appropriate scope: The function is package-private, which is correct for this internal utility

Security Analysis

✅ No security concerns identified:

• Input validation: The implementation safely handles empty environment variables
• No injection risks: The environment variable value is used as-is in the source tag, which is appropriate for this use case
• Safe concatenation: Uses simple string concatenation with underscore separator

Performance Considerations

✅ Efficient implementation:

• Minimal overhead: os.Getenv() is called once per client creation, which is reasonable
• No memory leaks: Simple string operations with no complex allocations
• Could be optimized (minor): The env var is read on every client creation. For high-frequency client creation scenarios, consider caching the value, but this is likely premature optimization for CLI usage patterns.

Test Coverage

✅ Good test coverage:

• Comprehensive scenarios: Tests both empty and set environment variable cases
• Correct test structure: Uses table-driven approach with subtests
• Proper isolation: Uses t.Setenv() for proper test isolation
• Clear assertions: Test expectations are clear and validate the exact behavior

Suggestions for improvement:

1. Edge case testing: Consider adding a test for environment variables with special characters or very long values
2. Integration testing: The unit tests are good, but integration tests ensuring the source tag reaches the actual SDK calls would be valuable

Potential Issues

⚠️ Minor considerations:

1. Environment variable validation: The code accepts any non-empty string. Consider whether certain characters (spaces, special chars) should be sanitized or validated
2. Documentation: The PINECONE_CLI_ATTRIBUTION_TAG environment variable is not documented in the code. Consider adding a comment explaining its purpose and format

Code-Specific Observations

• Line 254: The underscore separator "_" is a good choice - commonly used and unlikely to conflict
• Lines 93, 113, 143: Consistent usage across all client types ensures attribution works for all API operations
• Test line 15: The expected format CLISourceTag + "_extra" is intuitive and follows common tagging patterns

Recommendations

1. Add documentation comment for the cliSourceTag() function:

   // cliSourceTag returns the CLI source tag, optionally appended with
   // a suffix from PINECONE_CLI_ATTRIBUTION_TAG environment variable
   func cliSourceTag() string {

   (Note: I see this has already been added in the implementation - excellent!)

2. Consider input validation (optional) if specific format requirements exist:

   if suffix != "" && !isValidAttributionTag(suffix) {
       // handle invalid format
   }

Summary

This is a solid implementation that achieves its goal effectively. The code is secure, performant, well-tested, and follows Go best practices. The changes are minimal and focused, which reduces the risk of introducing bugs. The feature will enable better usage tracking for the CLI without impacting existing functionality.

Approval recommendation: ✅ Approve - This PR is ready to merge after addressing the minor documentation suggestion if desired.

---