[Dashboard] Fix validation for smart account options

[joaquim-verges]

<!--

%23%23 title your PR with this format: "[Dashboard] Fix: Smart account factory validation for EIP-7702"

If you did not copy the branch name from Linear, paste the issue tag here (format is TEAM-0000):

%23%23 Notes for the reviewer

This PR fixes a bug where the custom account factory address was being validated even when the smart account execution mode was set to EIP-7702, which does not require a factory address.

The Zod validation schema for `customAccountFactoryAddress` has been updated to only apply validation (both address format and required checks) when:
1. Smart accounts are enabled.
2. The execution mode is `EIP4337`.
3. The account factory type is `custom`.

This ensures the validation logic aligns with the UI, where the factory input is hidden for EIP-7702.

%23%23 How to test

1. Navigate to an ecosystem's configuration page (`/team/[team_slug]/~/ecosystem/[slug]/configuration`).
2. Enable smart accounts.
3. Set "Execution Mode" to "ERC-4337".
4. Set "Account Factory Type" to "Custom".
5. Leave the "Custom Account Factory Address" field empty.
6. Click "Save" (it should show an error, as expected).
7. Now, change "Execution Mode" to "EIP-7702" (without filling the custom factory address).
8. Click "Save".
9. **Expected:** The form should save successfully without any validation error related to the custom factory address.

-->

---

PR-Codex overview

This PR enhances the validation logic in the AuthOptionsForm component to ensure that a custom account factory address is provided when certain conditions are met. It specifically checks for the EIP4337 execution mode and the custom account factory type.

Detailed summary

• Added a new validation rule to ensure customAccountFactoryAddress is provided when:
  • useSmartAccount is true
  • executionMode is "EIP4337"
  • accountFactoryType is "custom"
• Updated the conditional check for useSmartAccount to include executionMode in the main logic.

✨ Ask PR-Codex anything about this PR by commenting with /codex {your question}

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Improved validation for the custom account factory address field, ensuring it is required when specific smart account options are selected.

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 4842fe2

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[vercel]

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

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
thirdweb-www	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Jul 4, 2025 1:20am

4 Skipped Deployments

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
docs-v2	⬜️ Skipped (Inspect)			Jul 4, 2025 1:20am
nebula	⬜️ Skipped (Inspect)			Jul 4, 2025 1:20am
thirdweb_playground	⬜️ Skipped (Inspect)			Jul 4, 2025 1:20am
wallet-ui	⬜️ Skipped (Inspect)			Jul 4, 2025 1:20am

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The update adds a new validation rule requiring customAccountFactoryAddress to be non-empty when useSmartAccount is true, executionMode is "EIP4337", and accountFactoryType is "custom". It also restricts the construction of smartAccountOptions to these conditions.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
apps/dashboard/src/app/(app)/team/[team_slug]/(team)/~/ecosystem/[slug]/(active)/configuration/components/client/auth-options-form.client.tsx	Added conditional required validation for customAccountFactoryAddress in form schema; restricted smartAccountOptions construction to specific conditions.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant User
    participant AuthOptionsForm
    participant ValidationSchema

    User->>AuthOptionsForm: Submit form
    AuthOptionsForm->>ValidationSchema: Validate fields
    alt useSmartAccount=true AND executionMode="EIP4337" AND accountFactoryType="custom"
        ValidationSchema->>AuthOptionsForm: Require customAccountFactoryAddress (non-empty)
        alt customAccountFactoryAddress missing
            ValidationSchema->>User: Show error "Please enter a custom account factory address."
        else customAccountFactoryAddress present
            ValidationSchema->>AuthOptionsForm: Continue validation
        end
    else
        ValidationSchema->>AuthOptionsForm: Continue validation
    end
    AuthOptionsForm->>User: Return validation result

Loading

Warning

Review ran into problems

🔥 Problems

Errors were encountered while retrieving linked issues.

Errors (3)

• EIP-7702: Entity not found: Issue - Could not find referenced Issue.
• TEAM-0000: Entity not found: Issue - Could not find referenced Issue.
• ERC-4337: Entity not found: Issue - Could not find referenced Issue.

---

📜 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 bf5b060 and 4842fe2.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• apps/dashboard/src/app/(app)/team/[team_slug]/(team)/~/ecosystem/[slug]/(active)/configuration/components/client/auth-options-form.client.tsx (3 hunks)

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

• apps/dashboard/src/app/(app)/team/[team_slug]/(team)/~/ecosystem/[slug]/(active)/configuration/components/client/auth-options-form.client.tsx

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (8)

• GitHub Check: Size
• GitHub Check: Unit Tests
• GitHub Check: Build Packages
• GitHub Check: E2E Tests (pnpm, esbuild)
• GitHub Check: E2E Tests (pnpm, vite)
• GitHub Check: Lint Packages
• GitHub Check: E2E Tests (pnpm, webpack)
• GitHub Check: Analyze (javascript)

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate Docstrings

---

🪧 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 docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in 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.

[graphite-app]

How to use the Graphite Merge Queue

Add either label to this PR to merge it via the merge queue:

• merge-queue - adds this PR to the back of the merge queue
• hotfix - for urgent hot fixes, skip the queue and merge this PR next

You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link.

An organization admin has enabled the Graphite Merge Queue in this repository.

Please do not merge from GitHub as this will restart CI on PRs being processed by the merge queue.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 51.96%. Comparing base (0e159f7) to head (4842fe2).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #7522   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   51.96%   51.96%           
=======================================
  Files         952      952           
  Lines       64224    64224           
  Branches     4239     4238    -1     
=======================================
  Hits        33377    33377           
  Misses      30740    30740           
  Partials      107      107           

Flag	Coverage Δ
packages	51.96% <ø> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

size-limit report 📦

Path	Size	Loading time (3g)	Running time (snapdragon)	Total time
thirdweb (esm)	63.11 KB (0%)	1.3 s (0%)	224 ms (+153.99% 🔺)	1.5 s
thirdweb (cjs)	352.76 KB (0%)	7.1 s (0%)	697 ms (+20.55% 🔺)	7.8 s
thirdweb (minimal + tree-shaking)	5.72 KB (0%)	115 ms (0%)	87 ms (+1892.04% 🔺)	202 ms
thirdweb/chains (tree-shaking)	530 B (0%)	11 ms (0%)	33 ms (+1747.9% 🔺)	43 ms
thirdweb/react (minimal + tree-shaking)	19.57 KB (-0.1% 🔽)	392 ms (-0.1% 🔽)	67 ms (+392.26% 🔺)	458 ms