Review and simplify entity types definitions and arguments #220
Description
The entity types in our graphql definition are inconsistent. There's a lot of room for nullable fields that aren't nullable. Some have descriptions, most don't.
The purpose of this issue is to review an simplify the entity type so that:
- field are not marked as nullable when they can't be null
- fields/entities are annotated with descriptions for better DC
- take the oppertunity to review on the type inheritance from entity types, args, input and refactor into something that can easily scale as the complexity of the API grows
- Implement unit tests where needed
- Review the type checker as we're building with swc which doesnt implement an alternative to
tsc
Can you explain why ID's have been marked as nullable? I see the commit message for https://github.com/hypercerts-org/hypercerts-api/pull/214/commits/05b1e8d4d9a3ac5657fcbfbb56b8a85c282e8549 but I feel like the ID's are actually never optional, so I think we should lean the other way?
Originally posted by @Jipperism in #214 (comment)