apps/docs/app/global/question-types/net-promoter-score/page.mdx (4)

5-9: LGTM: Clear heading and introduction.

The main heading and introduction effectively introduce the Net Promoter Score question type, aligning with the PR objectives.

Consider adding a brief mention of the NPS's importance in measuring customer loyalty or satisfaction to provide more context for users unfamiliar with this metric.

---

11-16: Consider optimizing image quality for better performance.

The MdxImage component is used correctly to display the Net Promoter Score overview. The alt text is descriptive, which is great for accessibility.

Consider reducing the quality prop from 100 to a lower value (e.g., 80 or 90) to optimize page load times while maintaining good image quality. For example:

 <MdxImage
   src={NetPromoterScore}
   alt="Overview of Net Promoter Score question type"
-  quality="100"
+  quality="80"
   className="max-w-full rounded-lg sm:max-w-3xl"
 />

---

18-28: LGTM: Configuration section provides useful customization info.

The configuration section effectively explains the options for customizing the Net Promoter Score question, including labels and color coding.

Consider the following enhancements:

1. Add an example of how the color coding appears (e.g., "red for low scores, yellow for medium, and green for high").
2. Mention if there are any best practices or recommendations for using these configuration options.

---

30-37: LGTM: Preview section with minor suggestions.

The preview section effectively includes a visual representation of the Net Promoter Score question type, aligning with the PR objectives.

1. Consider optimizing the image quality as suggested earlier:

 <MdxImage
   src={NetPromoterScorePreview}
   alt="Perview of Net Promoter Score question type"
-  quality="100"
+  quality="80"
   className="max-w-full rounded-lg sm:max-w-lg"
 />

2. There's a typo in the alt text. Change "Perview" to "Preview":

-  alt="Perview of Net Promoter Score question type"
+  alt="Preview of Net Promoter Score question type"

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/multi-select/page.mdx (2)

10-21: Content looks good, but consider optimizing image quality.

The explanation of the Multi Select question type is clear and concise. The use of the MdxImage component for visual representation is excellent and aligns with the PR objectives.

Consider reducing the image quality from "100" to a lower value (e.g., "80" or "90") to optimize page load times while maintaining good visual quality. For example:

<MdxImage
  src={MultiSelect}
  alt="Overview of Multi Select question type"
-  quality="100"
+  quality="90"
  className="max-w-full rounded-lg sm:max-w-3xl"
/>

---

23-34: Content is informative, but consider some improvements.

The configurations and preview sections provide valuable information about the Multi Select question type. The reference to single select questions is helpful for users.

1. Consider reducing the image quality from "100" to a lower value (e.g., "80" or "90") to optimize page load times while maintaining good visual quality.

2. In the Configurations section, it might be helpful to provide more specific details about the configuration options for Multi Select questions. For example:

# Configurations

- Other than the fact that respondents can select multiple options, multi select questions are similar to [single select](/global/question-types/single-select) questions.
+ Multi select questions share many configuration options with [single select](/global/question-types/single-select) questions, with the key difference being that respondents can choose multiple options. Some specific configurations for multi select questions include:
+ 
+ - Minimum and maximum number of selectable options
+ - Option to include an "Other" field for custom responses
+ - Randomization of option order

This addition would provide more value to users looking for specific configuration details.

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/ranking/page.mdx (3)

5-9: LGTM: Clear and concise introduction. Consider adding an example.

The introduction provides a clear explanation of the Ranking question type, aligning well with the PR objectives. To further enhance user understanding, consider adding a brief example of how a ranking question might be used in a survey context.

---

18-31: LGTM: Comprehensive configuration details. Consider adding information on option limits.

The Configuration section effectively explains the main settings for the Ranking question type, fulfilling the PR objective of detailing specific features. To make it even more informative, consider mentioning if there's a maximum limit to the number of options that can be added.

---

1-40: LGTM: Well-structured and comprehensive documentation. Consider minor enhancements.

The document provides a thorough explanation of the Ranking question type, aligning well with the PR objectives. The structure is logical, and the content is informative. To further improve:

1. Consider adding a brief real-world example of a ranking question in a survey context.
2. If applicable, mention any limitations or best practices for the number of ranking options.
3. You might want to include a brief note on how the data from ranking questions is typically used or analyzed.

These additions would make the documentation even more valuable to users.

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/picture-selection/page.mdx (2)

10-14: LGTM: Clear introduction to Picture Selection question type.

The introduction effectively explains the purpose and functionality of the Picture Selection question type. For consistency with other documentation pages, consider adding a brief sentence about when this question type is particularly useful or its common applications.

---

23-31: LGTM: Clear configuration details provided.

The configuration section effectively outlines the key settings for the Picture Selection question type. To enhance user understanding, consider adding information about:

1. Maximum number of images allowed (if any).
2. Supported image formats.
3. Recommended image dimensions or aspect ratio.

This additional information would help users prepare their images appropriately.

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/address/page.mdx (1)

11-16: Consider optimizing image quality for better performance.

While the image implementation is good overall, setting the quality to 100 might be unnecessarily high. Consider reducing it to a value between 80-90 to optimize page load times without significantly impacting visual quality.

 <MdxImage
   src={Address}
   alt="Overview of Address question type"
-  quality="100"
+  quality="85"
   className="max-w-full rounded-lg sm:max-w-3xl"
 />

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/rating/page.mdx (2)

5-8: Consider enhancing the metadata description.

The current description is accurate but could be more specific to highlight the unique aspects of the Rating question type.

Consider updating the description to:

 export const metadata = {
   title: "Rating",
-  description: "Rating questions allow respondents to rate questions on a scale",
+  description: "Rating questions enable respondents to evaluate items on a customizable scale using stars, numbers, or smileys.",
 };

This revised description provides more detail about the customization options available for the Rating question type.

---

37-37: Consider rephrasing the default label description.

The static analysis tool suggests avoiding overused intensifiers like "very".

Consider updating the sentence to:

-Add labels for the lower and upper bounds of the rating scale. The default is "Not good" and "Very good".
+Add labels for the lower and upper bounds of the rating scale. The default is "Not good" and "Excellent".

This change maintains the meaning while using a more impactful adjective for the upper bound.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[style] ~37-~37: As an alternative to the over-used intensifier ‘very’, consider replacing this phrase.
Context: ...g scale. The default is "Not good" and "Very good". # Preview <MdxImage src={RatingPe...

(EN_WEAK_ADJECTIVE)

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/contact/page.mdx (3)

5-16: LGTM: Well-structured Question Type section with clear explanation.

The content effectively introduces the Contact Info question type, meeting the documentation objectives. The use of the MdxImage component with appropriate properties is commendable.

Consider adding a brief sentence about the importance or use cases of collecting contact information in surveys. This could provide more context for users implementing this question type.

---

18-29: LGTM: Comprehensive Configuration section with clear options.

The Configuration section effectively outlines all the customizable aspects of the Contact Info question type, meeting the documentation objectives.

To enhance user understanding, consider adding a code snippet or configuration example that shows how these options might be set in practice. This could help users visualize the implementation more concretely.

---

1-38: Great job on the Contact Info question type documentation!

The file structure and content align well with the PR objectives, providing a clear and comprehensive guide for the Contact Info question type. The use of MDX, appropriate images, and well-organized sections contributes to an effective documentation page.

To fully meet the PR objectives, consider adding a side-by-side comparison of the question form (left side) and the corresponding question as it appears in the survey (right side). This visual representation would further enhance user understanding of how the Contact Info question type is implemented and displayed.

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/matrix/page.mdx (3)

9-10: LGTM: Clear description of the Matrix question type.

The description effectively explains the key features of the Matrix question type. To further enhance clarity, consider adding an example:

 Matrix questions allow respondents to select a value for each option presented in rows. The values range from 0 to a user-defined maximum (e.g., 0 to X). The selection is made using radio buttons, and users can choose any value within the defined range, including 0.
+For example, in a customer satisfaction survey, respondents might rate different aspects of a service on a scale from 0 to 5.

---

11-16: Consider optimizing image quality for better performance.

The MdxImage component is well-implemented, but setting the quality to "100" might result in unnecessarily large file sizes. Consider reducing the quality to a value between 80-90 for a good balance between image quality and file size.

 <MdxImage
   src={Matrix}
   alt="Overview of Matrix question type"
-  quality="100"
+  quality="85"
   className="max-w-full rounded-lg sm:max-w-3xl"
 />

---

18-33: LGTM: Well-structured configuration and options section.

The configuration and options for the Matrix question type are clearly explained. For consistency, consider using the same formatting for all option descriptions:

 ## Rows
 
-- **Rows:** Define the options shown on the left side of the matrix. These represent the items for which users will select a value.
+- **Rows**: Define the options shown on the left side of the matrix. These represent the items for which users will select a value.
 
 ## Columns
 
-- **Columns:** Represent the range of values from 0 to X (right side of the screen). Users can choose any value, including 0, using radio buttons.
+- **Columns**: Represent the range of values from 0 to X (right side of the screen). Users can choose any value, including 0, using radio buttons.
 
 ## Select ordering
 
-- **Keep current order** : This will keep the order of options the same for all respondents.
-- **Randomize all** : This will randomize the options for each respondent.
+- **Keep current order**: This will keep the order of options the same for all respondents.
+- **Randomize all**: This will randomize the options for each respondent.

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/consent/page.mdx (2)

18-26: LGTM with a minor suggestion: Well-structured configuration details.

The Configuration and Options section provides clear and comprehensive information about the components of the Consent question type. The explanations are well-structured and easy to understand.

Consider adjusting the heading levels for consistency:

-# Configuration
-
-# Options
+# Configuration
+
+## Options

This change will improve the document structure and maintain a clear hierarchy.

---

1-35: Excellent work: Documentation meets PR objectives and maintains high quality.

This documentation for the Consent question type successfully meets the objectives outlined in the PR. Key achievements include:

1. Detailed explanations of features specific to the Consent question type.
2. Effective use of visual content, with both overview and preview images.
3. Consistent structure that aligns with the documentation guidelines.
4. Use of .webp format for images as required.

The content is well-organized, informative, and user-friendly, contributing to an improved documentation experience for the Formbricks platform.

To further enhance the documentation:

1. Consider adding examples of use cases or scenarios where the Consent question type would be particularly useful.
2. If applicable, include any best practices or tips for effectively using this question type in surveys.

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/date/page.mdx (3)

6-17: Enhance alt text for better accessibility.

The Question Type section provides a good overview of the Date question type. However, the alt text for the image could be more descriptive to improve accessibility.

Consider updating the alt text to be more specific:

- alt="Overview of Date question type"
+ alt="Example of a Date question type showing title, description, and date input field"

---

19-28: Clarify required/optional status for configuration options.

The Configuration and Options sections provide clear information about the available settings. To enhance user understanding, consider specifying whether each option is required or optional.

Suggestion:

1. Update the Title option to indicate if it's required:

   - 1. **Title:** Add a clear title to inform the respondent what date you are asking for, such as "Select Your Availability."
   + 1. **Title:** (Required) Add a clear title to inform the respondent what date you are asking for, such as "Select Your Availability."

2. Update the Date Format option to indicate if it's required or has a default value:

   - 3. **Date Format:** Choose from multiple date formats for the input:
   + 3. **Date Format:** (Required) Choose from multiple date formats for the input. Default: MM-DD-YYYY

---

1-46: Great job on the Date question type documentation!

The documentation for the Date question type is well-structured and comprehensive, meeting the objectives outlined in the PR. Here's a summary of the strengths and suggestions for improvement:

Strengths:

1. Clear explanation of the Date question type and its use cases.
2. Detailed configuration options with examples.
3. Multiple preview images showing different states of the question type.
4. Proper use of .webp image format and MdxImage component.

Suggestions for improvement:

1. Enhance alt text for images to be more descriptive.
2. Clarify which configuration options are required or optional.
3. Fix the typo in the Preview section's alt text.

Consider adding a brief example of how to implement this question type in a survey, if applicable. This could provide additional value to users looking to quickly integrate the Date question type into their forms.

Overall, excellent work on creating this documentation page!

Would you like assistance in implementing any of the suggested improvements?

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/statement-cta/page.mdx (2)

9-10: Enhance clarity and correct minor issues in the description.

The description provides good information about the Statement question type, but there are a few areas for improvement:

1. Add an article before "Question" and "Short Note" for better readability.
2. Correct the spelling of "related" (currently "realted").
3. Consider hyphenating "call-to-action" for consistency.
4. Add a comma after "such as a message or instruction" for better flow.

Here's a suggested revision:

-The Statement question type allows you to display descriptive information in your survey, such as a message or instruction. It consists of a title (can be Question or Short Note) and a description, which can be a brief note(realted to CTA) or guideline. Instead of collecting input, this type includes a call to action button for further steps, such as booking an interview call.
+The Statement question type allows you to display descriptive information in your survey, such as a message or instruction, and consists of a title (which can be a Question or a Short Note) and a description, which can be a brief note (related to the call-to-action) or guideline. Instead of collecting input, this type includes a call-to-action button for further steps, such as booking an interview call.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[uncategorized] ~9-~9: Possible missing article found.
Context: ...ruction. It consists of a title (can be Question or Short Note) and a description, which...

(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_A)

---

[grammar] ~9-~9: It appears that two hyphens are missing.
Context: ... collecting input, this type includes a call to action button for further steps, such as booki...

(CALL_TO_ACTION_HYPHEN)

---

18-31: Improve formatting and correct minor issues in the configuration section.

The configuration and options section provides valuable information. However, there are a few areas that could be improved for clarity and consistency:

1. Use consistent heading levels (currently mixing # and ##).
2. Correct grammatical issues in the button options descriptions.
3. Improve formatting for better readability.

Here's a suggested revision:

 # Configuration
 
-# Options
+## Options
 
 ## Title and Description
 
 - **Title:** This is the main question or heading that appears at the top of the card.
 - **Description:** A brief note or instruction displayed under the title, typically used to provide context or instructions for the next step.
 
 ## Button Options
 
-- **Button to continue in survey** : This will continue respondent with the survey, form or fillups.
-- **Button to link to external URL** : Selecting this option will open-up URL input box bellow when us set URL the button will redirect to your setted link.
+- **Button to continue in survey**: This will allow the respondent to continue with the survey, form, or fillups.
+- **Button to link to external URL**: Selecting this option will open a URL input box below. When a URL is set, the button will redirect to your specified link.

These changes improve consistency in heading levels, correct grammatical issues, and enhance readability.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[style] ~30-~30: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Consider rewording the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
Context: ...t with the survey, form or fillups. - Button to link to external URL : Selecting t...

(ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE)

---

[uncategorized] ~30-~30: A comma might be missing here.
Context: ...pen-up URL input box bellow when us set URL the button will redirect to your setted...

(AI_EN_LECTOR_MISSING_PUNCTUATION_COMMA)

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/free-text/page.mdx (4)

10-21: LGTM: Introduction section is well-structured and informative.

The introduction provides a clear explanation of the Free Text question type, and the image implementation follows the PR objectives. Great job on using the .webp format for the image!

Consider adding an alt text that describes the content of the image more specifically, e.g., "Example of a Free Text question with title and input field".

---

23-37: LGTM: Configuration section is comprehensive and well-explained.

The configuration options are thoroughly detailed, covering both the placeholder and input type features. The explanations for each input type are clear and informative.

To improve readability, consider using a bullet point for the "Placeholder" explanation as well, to maintain consistency with the "Input Type" section.

---

39-46: LGTM: Preview section provides a visual example.

The preview section effectively includes a visual representation of the Free Text question type, which aligns with the PR objectives.

Consider adding a brief description of what the preview image shows, to provide context for users who may have images disabled or are using screen readers.

---

1-46: Great job on creating comprehensive documentation for the Free Text question type!

The file structure and content align well with the PR objectives. You've provided a clear explanation of the question type, its configuration options, and included appropriate visual content. The use of .webp format for images is also in line with the requirements.

To further enhance the documentation:

1. Consider adding a brief example or use case for the Free Text question type to help users understand when to use it.
2. You might want to include information about any limitations or best practices for using this question type.

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/advanced-setting/page.mdx (2)

20-29: LGTM! Consider adding a note about user experience

The explanation of the Required Toggle is clear and accurate. The image usage is appropriate and aligns with the PR objectives.

Consider adding a brief note about the user experience implications of making questions required. For example:

Note: Use required questions judiciously to balance data collection needs with user experience. Too many required questions may lead to survey abandonment.

---

31-40: Improve the structure of the Conditional Logic explanation

While the content provides a good overview of conditional logic functionality, the explanation could be more structured for better clarity.

Consider restructuring the explanation as follows:

#### Conditional Logic

Conditional logic allows you to create dynamic surveys based on respondents' answers. Key features include:

1. **Rule Setting**: Set conditions based on respondents' answers to specific questions.
2. **Action Triggering**: Define actions to be taken when conditions are met (e.g., showing or hiding questions).
3. **Flexibility**: Available for each question type, allowing for multiple rules per question.
4. **Dynamic Surveys**: Create branching logic to personalize the survey experience for each respondent.

This powerful feature enables you to design more engaging and relevant surveys tailored to individual responses.

[Image placement here]

Also, update the alt text for better accessibility:

-  alt="Overview of conditional logic for each question type"
+  alt="Conditional logic settings interface for question types"

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/single-select/page.mdx (1)

10-47: LGTM: Content structure and formatting are well-organized and informative.

The documentation is logically structured, providing a clear overview, detailed configuration options, and visual previews. This aligns well with the PR objectives of creating comprehensive documentation for each question type.

Consider adding a brief introductory paragraph before the "Question Type" heading to provide context for the entire page. This could help users quickly understand the purpose and importance of the Single Select question type.

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/schedule/page.mdx (1)

7-18: Enhance alt text for better accessibility.

The content in this section accurately describes the "Schedule A Meeting" question type. However, the alt text for the image could be more descriptive to improve accessibility.

Consider updating the alt text as follows:

-  alt="Overview of Schedule question type"
+  alt="Overview of Schedule A Meeting question type showing title, description, and date/time selection fields"

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/file-upload/page.mdx (4)

7-18: LGTM: Introduction section is well-structured and informative.

The introduction provides a clear overview of the File Upload question type, aligning with the PR objectives. The use of the MdxImage component with appropriate properties is commendable.

Consider adding a brief sentence about when or why a survey creator might choose to use the File Upload question type to provide more context for users.

---

20-34: LGTM: Configuration options are well-explained and illustrated.

The configuration options are clearly presented with detailed explanations for each setting. The use of an image to illustrate the max file size option enhances understanding.

To improve consistency, consider adding brief explanations or use cases for each configuration option, similar to the detail provided for the "Title" option.

---

36-43: LGTM: File type restrictions are well-explained and illustrated.

The explanation of file type restrictions is clear and concise. The use of an image to illustrate this option is helpful for users.

There's a minor typo in the alt text of the image. Consider changing "Overview of File Uploade question type option file type" to "Overview of File Upload question type option file type" for consistency and correctness.

---

45-52: LGTM: Preview section provides a clear visual representation.

The inclusion of a preview image effectively illustrates the File Upload question type, which aligns well with the PR objectives.

There's a minor typo in the alt text of the image. Consider changing "Perview of File Uploade question type" to "Preview of File Upload question type" for consistency and correctness.

apps/docs/lib/navigation.ts (2)

80-100: LGTM! Consider a minor improvement for consistency.

The new "Question Types" section is well-structured and aligns perfectly with the PR objectives. It provides easy access to documentation for each question type, which will greatly enhance the user experience.

For consistency with other titles in the navigation, consider changing "Statement(Call to Action)" to "Statement (Call to Action)" by adding a space after "Statement".

-          { title: "Statement(Call to Action)", href: "/global/question-types/statement-cta" },
+          { title: "Statement (Call to Action)", href: "/global/question-types/statement-cta" },

---

Line range hint 1-100: LGTM! Consider future improvements for navigation structure.

The changes to the navigation structure are well-implemented and focused. They enhance the documentation's accessibility without disrupting the existing layout.

For future improvements, consider:

1. Grouping similar features across different survey types (e.g., "Hidden Fields", "Multi Language Surveys") under a common "Global Features" section to reduce duplication and improve maintainability.

2. Implementing a more dynamic navigation structure that could automatically update when new question types or features are added, reducing the need for manual updates to this file.

These suggestions are not urgent and can be considered for future refactoring efforts.

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/rating/page.mdx (4)

5-8: Consider enhancing the metadata description.

The current description is accurate but could be more specific to highlight the unique aspects of the Rating question type.

Consider updating the description to:

 export const metadata = {
   title: "Rating",
-  description: "Rating questions allow respondents to rate questions on a scale",
+  description: "Rating questions enable respondents to evaluate items on a customizable scale using stars, numbers, or smileys",
 };

This revised description provides more detail about the customization options available for the Rating question type.

---

35-37: Enhance the explanation for Labels option.

While the explanation for the Labels option is clear, it could be more precise to avoid potential confusion.

Consider updating the explanation to:

 ## Labels

-Add labels for the lower and upper bounds of the rating scale. The default is "Not good" and "Very good".
+Add custom labels for the lower and upper bounds of the rating scale. If not specified, the default labels are "Not good" for the lower bound and "Very good" for the upper bound.

This revision clarifies that the labels are customizable and explicitly states which label corresponds to which bound.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[style] ~37-~37: As an alternative to the over-used intensifier ‘very’, consider replacing this phrase.
Context: ...g scale. The default is "Not good" and "Very good". # Preview <MdxImage src={RatingPe...

(EN_WEAK_ADJECTIVE)

---

1-46: LGTM: Well-structured and comprehensive documentation.

The file successfully meets the objectives outlined in the PR by providing a dedicated documentation page for the Rating question type. The structure is logical, and the content is relevant and informative.

For future improvements:

1. Consider adding examples of how to use the Rating question type in different scenarios.
2. Include information on any limitations or best practices for using this question type.

These additions would further enhance the value of the documentation for users.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[style] ~37-~37: As an alternative to the over-used intensifier ‘very’, consider replacing this phrase.
Context: ...g scale. The default is "Not good" and "Very good". # Preview <MdxImage src={RatingPe...

(EN_WEAK_ADJECTIVE)

---

37-37: Consider the default label wording.

The static analysis tool suggests replacing "Very good" with an alternative to avoid the over-used intensifier 'very'. However, in the context of a default label for a rating scale, "Very good" is a common and easily understood phrase.

If you decide to change it, consider alternatives like "Excellent" or "Outstanding". However, be aware that these might be perceived as more extreme than "Very good". The current wording is acceptable if you believe it best serves your users.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[style] ~37-~37: As an alternative to the over-used intensifier ‘very’, consider replacing this phrase.
Context: ...g scale. The default is "Not good" and "Very good". # Preview <MdxImage src={RatingPe...

(EN_WEAK_ADJECTIVE)

apps/docs/app/global/question-types/statement-cta/page.mdx (2)

9-9: Improve clarity and correct minor issues in the overview paragraph.

The overview provides a good explanation of the Statement question type. However, there are a few minor issues that can be addressed to enhance clarity and correctness:

1. Add a hyphen to "call-to-action" for consistency.
2. Correct the spelling of "related" (currently "realted").
3. Consider adding an article before "Question" and "Short Note" for better readability.

Here's a suggested revision:

- The Statement question type allows you to display descriptive information in your survey, such as a message or instruction. It consists of a title (can be Question or Short Note) and a description, which can be a brief note(realted to CTA) or guideline. Instead of collecting input, this type includes a call to action button for further steps, such as booking an interview call.
+ The Statement question type allows you to display descriptive information in your survey, such as a message or instruction. It consists of a title (which can be a Question or a Short Note) and a description, which can be a brief note (related to the call-to-action) or guideline. Instead of collecting input, this type includes a call-to-action button for further steps, such as booking an interview call.

These changes will improve the overall quality and professionalism of the documentation.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[uncategorized] ~9-~9: Possible missing article found.
Context: ...ruction. It consists of a title (can be Question or Short Note) and a description, which...

(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_A)

---

[grammar] ~9-~9: It appears that two hyphens are missing.
Context: ... collecting input, this type includes a call to action button for further steps, such as booki...

(CALL_TO_ACTION_HYPHEN)

---

29-30: Improve clarity and correct grammatical issues in the button options description.

The description of the button options contains some grammatical issues and could be clearer. Here's a suggested revision:

- - **Button to continue in survey** : This will continue respondent with the survey, form or fillups.
- - **Button to link to external URL** : Selecting this option will open-up URL input box bellow when us set URL the button will redirect to your setted link.
+ - **Button to continue in survey**: This will allow the respondent to continue with the survey, form, or other fill-ups.
+ - **Button to link to external URL**: Selecting this option will open a URL input box. When a URL is set, the button will redirect to your specified link.

These changes address the following issues:

1. Improved punctuation and spacing.
2. Corrected grammar and sentence structure.
3. Enhanced clarity in describing the functionality.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[style] ~30-~30: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Consider rewording the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
Context: ...t with the survey, form or fillups. - Button to link to external URL : Selecting t...

(ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE)

---

[uncategorized] ~30-~30: A comma might be missing here.
Context: ...pen-up URL input box bellow when us set URL the button will redirect to your setted...

(AI_EN_LECTOR_MISSING_PUNCTUATION_COMMA)

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

apps/docs/components/SurveyEmbed.tsx (3)

7-7: LGTM: Component definition is correct. Consider removing React.FC for stricter prop typing.

The component definition follows modern React practices with correct props destructuring. For TypeScript users, consider removing React.FC for stricter prop typing:

const SurveyEmbed = ({ surveyUrl }: SurveyEmbedProps) => {
  // ...
}

This change allows TypeScript to infer the return type and provides stricter typing for children props.

---

8-23: LGTM: Render logic is correct. Consider some enhancements for maintainability and accessibility.

The component's render logic is correct and achieves the desired layout. However, consider the following suggestions for improvement:

1. Extract inline styles to a separate CSS module or styled-component for better maintainability.
2. Add a title attribute to the iframe for better accessibility:

<iframe
  title="Embedded Survey"
  src={surveyUrl}
  // ...
/>

3. Consider adding error handling or a loading state for cases where the survey URL might be invalid or slow to load.

---

1-25: Overall assessment: Well-implemented component that aligns with PR objectives.

The SurveyEmbed component is a well-structured and functional implementation that aligns with the PR objectives of enhancing documentation and providing visual content. It allows for easy embedding of surveys, which will improve the user experience in the documentation.

Some minor improvements have been suggested for maintainability and accessibility, but overall, this component serves its purpose effectively and is a valuable addition to the project.

Consider the following architectural advice:

1. As the project grows, you might want to create a dedicated components folder for reusable UI elements like this one.
2. If you plan to have multiple embed components in the future, consider creating a more generic Embed component that can be extended for different types of embeds.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/date/page.mdx (1)

11-11: LGTM with suggestion: Consider externalizing the survey URL.

The use of SurveyEmbed component is great for providing an interactive example. However, to improve maintainability, consider externalizing the survey URL to a configuration file or environment variable. This would make it easier to update or manage different environments (e.g., staging, production) in the future.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/contact/page.mdx (3)

11-11: LGTM! Survey embed enhances interactivity, but consider using a stable URL.

The inclusion of an embedded survey using the SurveyEmbed component is excellent and aligns with the feedback to provide interactive examples. However, the current URL appears to be a production link, which might be subject to changes.

Consider using a dedicated, stable URL for documentation purposes to ensure long-term reliability. You might want to create a specific survey for this documentation that won't be modified or deleted.

---

14-19: LGTM! Image usage is well-implemented with accessibility in mind.

The use of the MdxImage component with appropriate alt text, quality setting, and responsive sizing is excellent. This implementation ensures good visual representation across different devices and maintains accessibility.

Consider adding a caption to the image to provide additional context, especially since it's an overview of the Contact Info question type. This can be done by wrapping the MdxImage component in a figure element with a figcaption.

---

9-10: LGTM! Comprehensive explanation of the Contact Info question type.

The content provides a clear and detailed explanation of the Contact Info question type, including its purpose and customizable elements. This aligns well with the PR objective of explaining features specific to each question type.

Consider adding a brief example or use case for the Contact Info question type to help users understand when and how to best utilize this type of question in their surveys. This could be added after the initial description on line 10.

Also applies to: 21-36

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/net-promoter-score/page.mdx (2)

5-11: LGTM: Clear introduction and interactive example.

The introduction effectively explains the Net Promoter Score question type, and the use of the SurveyEmbed component provides an interactive example, which aligns well with the PR objectives.

Consider using a configuration file or environment variable for the survey URL to improve maintainability:

-<SurveyEmbed surveyUrl="https://app.formbricks.com/s/vqmpasmnt5qcpsa4enheips0" />
+<SurveyEmbed surveyUrl={process.env.NPS_SURVEY_URL} />

This change would allow easier updates to the survey URL without modifying the MDX file directly.

---

21-31: LGTM: Well-structured content with clear headings.

The content structure follows a consistent format with clear headings for different aspects of the NPS question type, aligning with the PR objectives for uniform documentation structure.

Consider expanding the "Add color coding" section to provide more details:

 ### Add color coding
-Add color coding to the score. This will show a color bar above the score.
+Add color coding to the score. This will display a color bar above the score, visually representing different ranges:
+- Red: Scores 0-6 (Detractors)
+- Yellow: Scores 7-8 (Passives)
+- Green: Scores 9-10 (Promoters)
+
+This visual aid helps quickly interpret the sentiment of the responses.

This addition would provide more context and value to the documentation.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/address/page.mdx (3)

5-8: LGTM: Content structure is well-organized.

The document structure follows a logical hierarchy with appropriate heading levels. The headings are concise and descriptive, which enhances readability.

Consider adding a brief introduction between the main title "Address" and the "Elements" section to provide an overview of what users can expect in this documentation page.

Also applies to: 13-14, 22-23, 25-26, 28-29

---

9-10: LGTM: Description and elements are well-explained.

The content provides a clear overview of the Address question type and its elements, aligning with the PR objectives. The description is concise, and the list of toggleable fields offers valuable information for users.

Consider adding a brief explanation of why a user might choose to toggle certain fields on or off. This could provide additional context and help users make informed decisions when configuring the question type.

Also applies to: 24-24, 27-27, 30-36

---

15-20: LGTM: Image component enhances visual documentation.

The MdxImage component is well-implemented, providing visual representation of the Address question type. The use of alt text and responsive class names enhances accessibility and user experience across different devices.

Consider adding a caption below the image to provide additional context or highlight key features visible in the screenshot. This can be done using a paragraph or a custom caption component if available.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/ranking/page.mdx (3)

11-11: LGTM: Survey embed enhances user interaction.

The embedded survey is a great addition that allows users to interact with the Ranking question type directly.

However, consider storing the survey URL in a configuration file or environment variable for easier maintenance and potential reuse.

---

13-19: LGTM: Image provides visual context, but consider optimizing.

The inclusion of the image aligns well with the PR objectives, providing visual context for the Ranking question type. The alt text is descriptive and appropriate.

However, setting the image quality to 100 might result in unnecessarily large file sizes. Consider reducing the quality to a value between 80-90 for a good balance between image quality and file size.

---

21-32: LGTM: Comprehensive explanation of Ranking question elements.

The detailed description of each element (Title, Description, Options, Select ordering) provides valuable information for users. The structure is consistent with other question type pages, which enhances overall documentation coherence.

To further improve this section, consider adding a brief example or use case for each element to illustrate its practical application.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/picture-selection/page.mdx (2)

10-16: LGTM: Clear introduction with interactive example.

The introduction effectively explains the Picture Selection question type, and the embedded survey provides an interactive example, which is excellent for user understanding. This aligns well with the PR objectives.

Consider storing the survey URL in a configuration file or environment variable for easier maintenance. This would allow for easier updates if the survey link changes in the future.

---

32-36: LGTM with minor suggestions: Images and Allow Multi Select sections.

The Images and Allow Multi Select sections provide valuable information about these features, aligning well with the PR objectives. However, there are two minor points to address:

1. In line 32, the word "Images" appears twice. This is likely due to Markdown formatting, where "### Images" is a header and the following "Images" starts the content. Consider rewording to avoid repetition.

2. In line 36, consider adding "the" before "user" for improved grammar: "This option allows the user to select more than one image."

Here's a suggested revision for lines 32-36:

### Images
Users can upload images via click or drag and drop. At least two images are required.

### Allow Multi Select
This option allows the user to select more than one image.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[duplication] ~32-~32: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Context: ...ription with further instructions. ### Images Images can be uploaded via click or drag and d...

(ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE)

---

[uncategorized] ~36-~36: You might be missing the article “the” here.
Context: ...# Allow Multi Select This option allows user to select more than one image.

(AI_EN_LECTOR_MISSING_DETERMINER_THE)

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/consent/page.mdx (3)

5-11: LGTM: Clear introduction and survey embed.

The title and introduction effectively describe the Consent question type, aligning with the PR objectives. The embedded survey is a great addition for interactive content.

Consider adding a brief sentence explaining how users can interact with the embedded survey, to enhance user engagement.

---

13-19: LGTM: Visual content aligns with PR objectives.

The inclusion of the MdxImage component with the Consent question type overview aligns well with the PR objectives. The use of the .webp format and the provision of alt text are commendable.

Consider adding a brief caption or description below the image to provide context and improve accessibility.

---

27-28: LGTM: Clear explanation of the Checkbox element.

The subsection for "Checkbox" provides a clear explanation of its purpose and editability, aligning well with the PR objectives.

Consider adding a brief note about any default text for the checkbox label or any character limits for the editable label to provide more comprehensive information.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/schedule/page.mdx (3)

9-11: Approve introduction, but consider generalizing the SurveyEmbed.

The introduction effectively describes the "Schedule A Meeting" question type. However, regarding the SurveyEmbed:

1. The PR comments mentioned plans to create and embed surveys for each page separately.
2. The current implementation uses a specific survey URL.

Consider replacing the specific survey URL with a placeholder or comment until the dedicated surveys are created. This will make it easier to update later and align with the planned approach mentioned in the PR comments.

-<SurveyEmbed surveyUrl="https://app.formbricks.com/s/hx08x27c2aghywh57rroe6fi" />
+{/* TODO: Replace with dedicated Schedule A Meeting survey URL */}
+<SurveyEmbed surveyUrl="PLACEHOLDER_URL" />

---

21-31: Approve element descriptions with a minor suggestion.

The documentation for the question type elements is clear, concise, and well-structured. It covers all the essential components: Title, Description, Cal.com integration, and Custom Hostname for self-hosted instances.

To enhance clarity, consider adding a brief example for the Cal.com Username/Event input. This could help users understand the expected format more easily.

 ### Cal.com Username/Event
-Add an input box where users can enter their [`cal.com`](https://cal.com/) username and event URL (e.g., `username/event`).
+Add an input box where users can enter their [`cal.com`](https://cal.com/) username and event URL.
+
+Example format: `username/event`
+
+For instance, if your Cal.com username is "johndoe" and your event slug is "meeting", you would enter: `johndoe/meeting`

---

1-31: Excellent documentation with a minor suggestion for completeness.

The documentation for the "Schedule A Meeting" question type is comprehensive, well-structured, and aligns perfectly with the PR objectives. It covers all the required elements and provides clear explanations for each feature.

To further enhance the documentation and align with the PR objectives, consider adding a brief section about the configuration options for this question type. This could include any specific settings or customization options available to the survey creator when using this question type.

For example:

## Configuration Options

When adding a "Schedule A Meeting" question to your survey, you can customize the following options:

- **Required**: Make the scheduling step mandatory for respondents.
- **Time Zone**: Set a default time zone for the scheduling interface.
- **Available Time Slots**: Define the range of dates and times available for booking.

These configuration options allow you to tailor the scheduling experience to your specific needs and those of your respondents.

Adding this section would provide a complete picture of the question type's capabilities and usage.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/multi-select/page.mdx (3)

10-16: Good introduction and interactive example.

The introduction clearly explains the Multi Select question type. The embedded survey provides an interactive example, which is excellent for user understanding.

Consider using an environment variable or a configuration file for the survey URL to improve maintainability. This would allow easier updates across all documentation pages if the survey URLs change in the future.

---

19-24: Image component usage is correct and accessible.

The MdxImage component is used effectively to display the Multi Select question type overview. The alt text is descriptive, which is great for accessibility.

Consider reducing the image quality from 100 to a lower value (e.g., 80-90) to optimize file size without significantly impacting visual quality. This can improve page load times, especially for users with slower internet connections.

---

35-36: Good comparison and cross-referencing.

The note comparing Multi Select to Single Select questions is helpful, and the link to the Single Select documentation provides valuable context.

Consider adding a brief explanation of the key difference between Multi Select and Single Select questions to provide immediate clarity for readers who may not click through to the Single Select documentation.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/rating/page.mdx (1)

39-39: Consider the phrasing of the upper bound label.

The static analysis tool suggests an alternative to "Very good" as it's considered an overused intensifier. However, in the context of rating scales, this phrasing is common and well-understood by users.

While you could consider alternatives like "Excellent" or "Outstanding", the current phrasing "Very good" is acceptable and doesn't require a change unless you prefer a different style.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[style] ~39-~39: As an alternative to the over-used intensifier ‘very’, consider replacing this phrase.
Context: ...g scale. The default is "Not good" and "Very good".

(EN_WEAK_ADJECTIVE)

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/statement-cta/page.mdx (2)

9-9: Enhance clarity and correct minor issues in the introductory paragraph.

The introductory paragraph provides a good overview, but there are a few areas for improvement:

1. Add a missing article before "Question" and "Short Note".
2. Correct the spelling of "related".
3. Use a hyphen in "call-to-action" for consistency.

Consider applying this diff to improve the paragraph:

-The Statement question type allows you to display descriptive information in your survey, such as a message or instruction. It consists of a title (can be Question or Short Note) and a description, which can be a brief note(realted to CTA) or guideline. Instead of collecting input, this type includes a call to action button for further steps, such as booking an interview call.
+The Statement question type allows you to display descriptive information in your survey, such as a message or instruction. It consists of a title (can be a Question or a Short Note) and a description, which can be a brief note (related to CTA) or guideline. Instead of collecting input, this type includes a call-to-action button for further steps, such as booking an interview call.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[uncategorized] ~9-~9: Possible missing article found.
Context: ...ruction. It consists of a title (can be Question or Short Note) and a description, which...

(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_A)

---

[grammar] ~9-~9: It appears that two hyphens are missing.
Context: ... collecting input, this type includes a call to action button for further steps, such as booki...

(CALL_TO_ACTION_HYPHEN)

---

13-26: LGTM: Elements section is well-structured and informative.

The use of the MdxImage component and the explanations of the Title and Description elements are clear and helpful.

Consider adding a brief introductory sentence before listing the elements to provide context, such as:

## Elements
The Statement question type consists of the following key elements:

<MdxImage ... />

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/matrix/page.mdx (2)

9-11: LGTM: Clear introduction and interactive example.

The introductory paragraph effectively explains matrix questions. The inclusion of the SurveyEmbed component aligns well with the PR objectives, providing an interactive example for users.

Consider adding a brief sentence before the SurveyEmbed component to introduce the interactive example, such as:
"Here's an interactive example of a matrix question:"

---

33-36: LGTM: Clear explanation of select ordering options.

The select ordering section effectively explains the two available options for ordering matrix questions. This information is valuable for users looking to customize their surveys.

For consistency with the other sections, consider adding a brief introductory sentence before listing the options, such as:
"Choose how you want the options to be presented to respondents:"

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/file-upload/page.mdx (3)

5-9: LGTM: Clear title and introduction. Consider adding a brief note on use cases.

The title and introduction effectively explain the File Upload question type and its key features. This aligns well with the PR objectives of creating dedicated documentation for each question type.

To further enhance the introduction, consider adding a brief note on specific use cases or scenarios where the File Upload question type would be particularly useful. This could help users better understand when to employ this question type in their surveys.

---

11-19: LGTM: Visual elements enhance documentation. Consider externalizing the survey URL.

The embedded survey and image components effectively illustrate the File Upload question type, aligning with the PR objectives for visual content and feature explanation.

To improve maintainability, consider externalizing the survey URL. You could store it in a configuration file or environment variable, making it easier to update across multiple pages if needed. For example:

- <SurveyEmbed surveyUrl="https://app.formbricks.com/s/oo4e6vva48w0trn01ht8krwo" />
+ <SurveyEmbed surveyUrl={process.env.FILE_UPLOAD_SURVEY_URL} />

This approach would require setting up the environment variable or configuration file accordingly.

---

27-34: LGTM: Comprehensive explanation of additional features. Consider adding specific examples.

The descriptions of Allow Multiple Files, Max File Size, and File Type Restrictions are clear and informative, aligning well with the PR objectives of providing detailed feature explanations.

To further enhance this section, consider adding specific examples or use cases for each feature. For instance:

1. Allow Multiple Files: "This is useful when collecting multiple documents, such as a resume and cover letter."
2. Max File Size: "For example, setting a limit of 10MB per file to manage server storage."
3. File Type Restrictions: "You might restrict uploads to '.pdf' and '.docx' for text documents, or '.jpg' and '.png' for images."

These examples would provide users with a clearer understanding of how to effectively use these features in their surveys.

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/free-text/page.mdx (2)

18-24: Enhance alt text for better accessibility.

The image implementation looks good and follows the required format. To improve accessibility, consider providing a more descriptive alt text:

-  alt="Overview of Free Text question type"
+  alt="Screenshot showing the layout of a Free Text question with title, description, and input field"

---

35-43: Minor grammatical fix and suggestion for consistency.

The Input Type section provides clear explanations of the available options. Please consider the following changes:

1. Add a missing comma in line 39:

-- **Text**: A text area input. This can be converted to a single line input field if needed, by toggling the _"Long answer"_ switch at the bottom of the question segment.
++ **Text**: A text area input. This can be converted to a single line input field if needed, by toggling the _"Long answer"_ switch at the bottom of the question segment.

2. For consistency, consider adding brief explanations of when to use each input type. For example:

- **Email**: A single-line text input that validates the input as an email address. Use this when collecting email addresses.
- **URL**: A single-line text input that validates the input as a URL. Ideal for gathering website or social media profile links.

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[uncategorized] ~39-~39: Possible missing comma found.
Context: ...can be converted to a single line input field if needed, by toggling the _"Long answe...

(AI_HYDRA_LEO_MISSING_COMMA)

apps/docs/app/global/question-type/single-select/page.mdx (1)

35-44: LGTM: Comprehensive explanation of additional actions.

The Additional Actions section provides clear and valuable information about the customization options for Single Select questions. This aligns well with the PR objectives of explaining features specific to each question type.

Consider adding a brief example or use case for each additional action to further enhance user understanding. For instance:

- Add "Other": Adds an "Other" option to allow respondents to enter a custom answer. This will show two inputs, one for the label text and one for the placeholder.
  Example: Use this when you want to capture responses that may not be covered by your predefined options.

- Convert to Multiple Select: Converts the question to a multiple select question. This will show checkboxes instead of radio buttons.
  Example: Useful when you want to allow respondents to select multiple applicable options.

- Order dropdown: Allows you to choose the order in which the options are displayed.
  Example: Use randomization to reduce bias in responses, or keep a specific order when options build upon each other.

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL