Add update_professional_contact tool to CRM extension

[swhitt]

Contribution Type

• Repo improvement (docs, CI, templates)

What does this do?

Adds the missing update_professional_contact tool to Extension 5 (Professional CRM), as proposed in #93 but never implemented. Accepts contact_id plus any combination of optional fields (name, company, title, email, phone, linkedin_url, how_we_met, tags, notes, follow_up_date). Only provided fields are updated. Also fixes follow_up_date being unwritable despite get_follow_ups_due querying it.

Requirements

Nothing new.

Checklist

• I've read CONTRIBUTING.md
• My contribution has a README.md with prerequisites, step-by-step instructions, and expected outcome
• My metadata.json has all required fields
• I tested this on my own Open Brain instance
• No credentials, API keys, or secrets are included

[matthallett1]

@claude review this PR

[matthallett1]

@claude review this PR

[github-actions]

Claude Code is working…

I'll analyze this and get back to you.

View job run

[matthallett1]

@claude review this PR

[github-actions]

Claude Code is working…

I'll analyze this and get back to you.

View job run

[matthallett1]

@claude review this PR

[github-actions]

Claude Code is working…

I'll analyze this and get back to you.

View job run

[matthallett1]

@claude review this PR

[github-actions]

Claude finished @matthallett1's task in 1m 34s —— View job

---

PR Review: Add update_professional_contact tool

• Gather context
• Read changed files
• Review alignment, safety, and design patterns
• Post findings

---

Overall: This is a clean, well-scoped addition that fills a real gap. Approving with a few minor notes.

---

What the PR Does

Adds Tool 7 (update_professional_contact) to the Professional CRM extension, plus a one-line header comment update. The tool accepts contact_id plus any combination of optional fields and only writes the fields that are actually provided.

---

Positives

• Correct partial-update pattern (index.ts:384–387): Using Object.entries(fields) to build a updates object and skipping undefined values is the right approach for a patch-style tool. No risk of accidentally nulling fields the user didn't mention.
• Empty-update guard (index.ts:389–391): Throws if no fields are provided, preventing a no-op DB roundtrip.
• User-scoped update (index.ts:396–397): .eq("id", contact_id).eq("user_id", userId) ensures users can only update their own contacts. This is critical and it's done correctly.
• Returns updated record (index.ts:398–399): .select().single() confirms the row was found and returns fresh data, so the caller knows the update took effect.
• follow_up_date fix: The schema has this column and get_follow_ups_due queries it, but there was no way to write it before. This unblocks a core workflow.

---

Minor Notes

1. notes and tags are destructive replacements (index.ts:379–380)

The descriptions already say "Replace…" which is good. However, users who use link_thought_to_contact (which appends to notes) may be surprised if they later call update_professional_contact with a new notes value and wipe those linked thoughts. No action required — just worth documenting in the README if it isn't already.

2. add_professional_contact still lacks follow_up_date (index.ts:64–114)

Pre-existing gap — the create tool has no follow_up_date parameter even though the schema supports it. This PR's update tool provides a workaround (create then immediately update), but a future PR could add follow_up_date to add_professional_contact for completeness. Not a blocker.

3. No date format validation on follow_up_date

z.string() accepts anything. The description says "YYYY-MM-DD" but there's no regex check. This is consistent with how expected_close_date is handled in create_opportunity, so not a regression — just worth noting if someone wants to harden the inputs later. Fix this →

---

Safety & Design Checklist

Check	Status
No credentials or hardcoded secrets	✅
No destructive SQL	✅
Remote Edge Function (not local Node.js server)	✅
User-scoped queries (user_id filter on update)	✅
Core thoughts table untouched	✅
Consistent with existing tool patterns in this file	✅

---

This is a solid contribution. The implementation is correct and the gap it fills is real. The minor notes above are non-blocking.

[github-actions]

Claude finished @matthallett1's task in 1m 1s —— View job

---

PR Review: Add update_professional_contact tool

• Gather context
• Read changed files
• Review alignment, safety, and design patterns
• Post findings

---

Overall: Clean, well-targeted addition. Approving with minor notes.

This PR fills a genuine gap — the CRM extension had no way to update contact fields or set follow_up_date, despite get_follow_ups_due relying on that column. The implementation is correct and consistent with the existing tool patterns.

---

What Changed

• index.ts:366–416: New Tool 7 update_professional_contact — patch-style update accepting contact_id + any combination of optional fields
• index.ts:4: Header comment updated to reflect add/update/search capability
• Tool previously numbered 7 (link_thought_to_contact) renumbered to Tool 8

---

Positives

• Correct partial-update pattern (index.ts:384–387): Iterating Object.entries(fields) and skipping undefined values is the right approach — no risk of accidentally nulling unmentioned fields.
• Empty-update guard (index.ts:389–391): Throws before hitting the database if no fields are provided. Good.
• User-scoped write (index.ts:396–397): .eq("id", contact_id).eq("user_id", userId) — users can only update their own contacts. Critical and correctly implemented.
• Returns updated record (index.ts:398–399): .select().single() confirms the row exists and was updated, giving the caller fresh data.
• follow_up_date unblocked: get_follow_ups_due (Tool 6) queries this column but there was previously no write path for it. This PR closes that loop.

---

Minor Notes

1. notes replacement may surprise users who used link_thought_to_contact

link_thought_to_contact (Tool 8) appends to notes. If a user later calls update_professional_contact with a new notes value, those linked thought references get overwritten. The description already says "Replace notes" — worth a one-liner in the README reinforcing this, but not a blocker.

2. add_professional_contact still lacks follow_up_date (index.ts:64–114)

Pre-existing gap. This PR's update tool provides a workaround (create, then update), but a follow-up PR adding follow_up_date to the create tool would complete the picture. Not a blocker for this PR.

3. No date format validation on follow_up_date (index.ts:381)

z.string() accepts any string. The description says "YYYY-MM-DD" but there's no enforcement. This is consistent with how expected_close_date is handled elsewhere in the file, so it's not a regression — just worth hardening later. Fix this →

---

Safety & Design Checklist

Check	Status
No credentials or hardcoded secrets	✅
No destructive SQL	✅
Remote Edge Function (not local Node.js)	✅
User-scoped update (user_id filter)	✅
Core thoughts table untouched	✅
Follows existing tool patterns in this file	✅
No new dependencies or standalone deployment	✅

---

The implementation is correct, safe, and fills a real functional gap in the CRM extension. The minor notes above are non-blocking. Good contribution.

[matthallett1]

Good work, Steve — the partial-update pattern is clean and the user-scoping is correct.

One issue to address before merging: follow_up_date can be set but never cleared. The update loop drops undefined values, and sending an empty string fails against the DATE column. This means once a follow-up is set, the contact is permanently stuck in get_follow_ups_due (which filters on follow_up_date IS NOT NULL).

Fix: Accept null or empty string for follow_up_date and follow_up_notes, and write null to the DB when clearing:

// In the update loop, handle null explicitly for clearable fields
if (key === 'follow_up_date' && (value === null || value === '')) {
  updates[key] = null;
} else if (value !== undefined) {
  updates[key] = value;
}

This unblocks the 'follow-up completed' workflow where users want to clear reminders after acting on them.

[swhitt]

Good catch, thanks; fixed. follow_up_date now accepts null or empty string, writing null to the DB so contacts can be cleared from get_follow_ups_due.

[alanshurafa]

Review feedback from @matthallett1 has been addressed in commit b598fef:

• follow_up_date clearing: Now accepts null or empty string to clear follow_up_date and follow_up_notes, unblocking the "follow-up completed" workflow.

Ready for re-review.