By skyforbes Hey guys, I was playing around with Gemini 3 Pro Preview over the API, for some reason, it sent me its raw CoT—like Claude does, isn’t it supposed to send thought signatures?:
<think>
I need to update `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` to ensure it uses the `stripe_customer_id` from the `user_billing` table consistently, similar to how I updated `app/api/billing/route.ts`.
Looking at the previous `read_file` output for `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts`:
It has a helper function `getOrCreateStripeCustomer`.
It checks `user_billing` for `stripe_customer_id`.
If not found, it creates a new customer and updates `user_billing`.
However, `app/api/billing/route.ts` now also relies on `stripe_customer_id` being present in `user_billing`.
The current implementation of `getOrCreateStripeCustomer` in `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` looks mostly correct, but I should verify if it needs any adjustments to align with the changes I made.
One thing to note is that `app/api/billing/route.ts` now *reads* `stripe_customer_id` but doesn't *create* it if missing (it just doesn't return payment methods if missing).
`app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` *creates* it if missing. This is fine.
However, I should verify if `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` is using `user_payment_methods` table anywhere else?
Lines 191-193 in `app/api/billing/route.ts` were using `user_payment_methods` but I replaced that.
In `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts`, it seems it *only* interacts with Stripe directly for payment methods (list, create setup intent, detach, update default).
Wait, let me double check the `read_file` output for `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` from earlier.
Lines 1-213:
It imports `createClient` and `Stripe`.
`getOrCreateStripeCustomer` (lines 11-44) queries `user_billing`.
`GET` (lines 47-96) calls `getOrCreateStripeCustomer`, then lists methods from Stripe.
`POST` (lines 99-134) calls `getOrCreateStripeCustomer`, then creates SetupIntent.
`DELETE` (lines 137-168) calls `stripe.paymentMethods.detach`.
`PATCH` (lines 171-213) calls `getOrCreateStripeCustomer`, then updates default payment method on customer.
It seems `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` does NOT use the `user_payment_methods` table. It uses Stripe API directly.
This is good.
The only "error" or inconsistency might be if `user_billing` doesn't exist for the user yet.
`getOrCreateStripeCustomer` handles checking `user_billing`.
If `user_billing` row is missing entirely, `supabase.from('user_billing').select…` might return no data.
Line 19: `if (billing?.stripe_customer_id)` checks if the column is present.
If `billing` is null (no row), it goes to create customer.
Then line 33: `upsert`. This will create the row if missing.
So `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` seems robust enough.
However, I noticed in `app/api/billing/route.ts` (the original version I read):
Lines 148-168: It creates a `user_billing` record if one doesn't exist.
`app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` also does an upsert if needed.
The main fix I applied to `app/api/billing/route.ts` was to stop using `user_payment_methods` table and instead fetch from Stripe using `stripe_customer_id`.
I should probably double check `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` to ensure it isn't doing anything weird with the deprecated `user_payment_methods` table if I missed it.
Scanning the previous `read_file` output for `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts`:
I don't see `user_payment_methods` string in it.
Wait, I should verify if I missed it.
I'll search for `user_payment_methods` in that file just to be sure using `search_files` again? No, I already searched for `user_payment_methods` in `app` and it only found it in `app/api/billing/route.ts` (which I fixed).
So `app/api/payment-methods/route.ts` is likely fine.
But, I should check `app/api/cron/usage-charge/route.ts` and others for any other "backend stuff" errors.
The prompt was "Any errors in the billing section (mostly backend stuff)?".
I have:
Let's look at `app/api/cron/usage-charge/route.ts` again.
It calculates usage charges.
It calls `process_usage_charge` RPC.
If balance negative, it stops instances.
It also deletes instances if negative for > 3 days.
One potential issue in `usage-charge`:
It iterates over *all* running instances.
If there are many instances, this might timeout (Vercel serverless function limit is usually 10s or 60s).
However, for now, it's probably fine unless they have thousands of instances.
Logic-wise:
Calculates `elapsedSec`.
Calculates `amount`.
Calls `process_usage_charge`.
Updates `last_billed_at`.
If `process_usage_charge` fails, it logs error and continues.
It seems reasonable.
What about `storage-charge`?
Iterates instances.
Checks if stopped.
Calculates storage cost.
Calls `process_usage_charge`.
Updates `last_storage_billed_at`.
One thing: `app/api/billing/route.ts` has a `GET` endpoint.
It fetches `user_invoices`.
I searched for `user_invoices` and it found it in `app/api/billing/route.ts`.
Is `user_invoices` a real table or view?
The code assumes it is.
If `user_invoices` is a view over `credit_ledger` or `stripe_transactions`, that's fine.
If it's a table that needs to be populated, I need to ensure it's being populated.
The webhook `app/api/webhooks/stripe/route.ts` calls `process_stripe_transaction` RPC.
The cron jobs call `process_usage_charge` RPC.
I should check if these RPCs or the tables they write to populate `user_invoices`.
Since I can't check the DB schema directly (only code), I have to infer from code or assume it exists.
However, `app/api/billing/route.ts` queries `user_invoices`.
If `user_invoices` is a view, I can't see its definition.
If `process_stripe_transaction` inserts into `user_invoices` (or a table that backs it), then it works.
I should look for any other potential errors.
One potential issue:
In `app/api/billing/route.ts` (my modified version):
`sessionOptions.customer = billingData.stripe_customer_id`
If `billingData.stripe_customer_id` exists, we attach it to the checkout session.
This is good because it links the checkout session to the existing Stripe customer, avoiding duplicate customers in Stripe.
</think>
This doesnt look like the summarized CoT in the gemini app or Aistudio, this looks like raw CoT