## Outcome
Builder-owned code now routes standard ID generation through
`@webstudio-is/sdk/createId` while preserving existing NanoID and UUID
formats.
Closes#6322
## Technical choices
- Use `createId("nano")` for Builder records, assets, transaction IDs,
and other existing NanoID-backed values.
- Use `createId()` for UUID-backed database records and browser-side
client IDs.
- Keep `BuilderRuntimeContext.createId` as an injectable dependency.
Runtime operations, copy/paste, and deterministic tests rely on that
injection.
- Keep Node's `randomUUID` in CLI paths that explicitly support running
without the Web Crypto global.
- Keep specialized generators for custom-alphabet project domains and
actual hash generation.
- Remove direct `nanoid` dependencies from packages where no specialized
use remains.
- Do not migrate existing data or change database schemas.
## Todo
- [x] Migrate Builder app ID creation.
- [x] Migrate project runtime and template defaults.
- [x] Migrate asset, project, domain, and authorization-token IDs.
- [x] Preserve runtime ID injection.
- [x] Review remaining direct generators as explicit exceptions.
- [x] Add NanoID-format regression coverage for the default runtime
context.
- [x] Review documentation impact: no user-facing documentation changes
are needed.
- [x] Review fixture impact: no fixture input or generated output format
changes are needed.
- [x] Run targeted tests, typechecks, lint, and package-boundary checks.
## Verification
- Targeted Builder tests: 153 passed after preserving runtime-context
injection.
- Project-build runtime tests: 270 passed.
- Asset uploader tests: 61 passed.
- Authorization-token tests: 17 passed.
- Project tests: 52 passed.
- Domain tests: 18 passed.
- CLI tests: 32 passed.
- Typechecks passed for Builder, project-build, asset-uploader,
authorization-token, project, and domain.
- `pnpm lint` passed.
- `pnpm check:package-boundaries` passed.
- The runtime-context format test was demonstrated to fail with a UUID
default and pass with the NanoID default.
- Agent evaluations were not run because they require separate explicit
approval.
## prettier -> oxfmt (0.58.0)
- .oxfmtrc.json generated with `oxfmt --migrate=prettier`: trailingComma
es5, printWidth 80 (oxfmt defaults to 100), sortPackageJson disabled,
.prettierignore patterns folded in (file deleted).
- ignorePatterns additionally exclude yml/yaml/toml/jsonc and
packages/cli/templates/** so oxfmt covers exactly the file set prettier
used to format (ts,tsx,js,json,css,md) and never touches user-facing
scaffolding artifacts.
- root `format` script, nano-staged pre-commit hook and the CI check
(`pnpm oxfmt --check`, replacing `prettier --cache --check` and its
actions/cache step — oxfmt checks the whole repo in ~0.7s) now run
oxfmt.
- every generator script that ran `prettier --write` on __generated__
output now runs `oxfmt` (css-data, icons, html-data, postgrest, sdk,
sdk-components-*, apps/builder tailwind preflight).
- the four scripts that used prettier's JS `format()` API write raw
source instead and their package.json scripts pipe the generated file
through the oxfmt CLI: project-build generate-docs +
generate-runtime-operation-contracts, cli generate-docs, apps/builder
generate-server-only-api-metadata. oxfmt rejects paths containing "..",
so cross-package generated files are formatted via a subshell cd into
the owning package.
- one-time reformat: oxfmt's canonical output differs from prettier on 8
repo source files (binary-operator continuation indent, import() call
wrapping, sub-pixel spacing of empty for-clauses); oxfmt honors existing
`// prettier-ignore` comments so intentional layouts are kept.
- prettier remains ONLY as a cli devDependency for the
prettier/standalone HTML normalizer inside html-to-jsx.test.ts, and
inside fixtures/ + packages/cli/templates/ (ships to scaffolded user
projects; out of scope here).
- editor config switched from esbenp.prettier-vscode to oxc.oxc-vscode
(devcontainer extension list, .vscode editor.defaultFormatter).
## oxlint 1.56 -> 1.73
- oxlint 1.73 rules-of-hooks special-cases hooks NAMED useEffectEvent:
their results may only be called from effects. Our
app/shared/hook-utils/effect-event.ts is a stable-callback helper
(useEvent pattern), intentionally called from event handlers and passed
as props. The rule is disabled via .oxlintrc.json overrides for the five
files doing this (product code untouched); note those files lose
hook-order linting entirely until the rule becomes configurable.
## TypeScript 5.8.2 -> 7.0.2 (native compiler)
- `tsc` is now the Go-based native binary; all `tsgo` script usages
(workspace packages and fixtures) renamed back to `tsc` and
@typescript/native-preview removed (the package is being phased out).
- fixes for TS7 changed defaults and stricter checks:
- `types` now defaults to [] -> base tsconfig sets "types": ["node"]
(restores the implicit-@types/node behavior of TS5).
- `rootDir` now defaults to ./ -> every tsconfig.dts.json sets
"rootDir": "./src" (TS5011 otherwise).
- import assertions removed -> cli/src/cli.ts uses `with { type: "json"
}` (TS2880).
- stricter isolatedDeclarations inference -> explicit annotations in
css-data bin/property-filter.ts (TS9010) and image image-dev.stories.tsx
(TS9013).
- declaration serialization limit -> project-build builder-runtime.ts
runtimeOperationContracts gets an explicit type (TS7056); the annotation
preserves the narrow RuntimeOperationId union.
- TS7 ships no stable programmatic API:
- react-sdk (component-generator tests drive the compiler API) aliases
its typescript devDependency to @typescript/typescript6@^6.0.2; its bin
is `tsc6`, so the package's typecheck still runs native TS7 tsc from the
workspace root.
- generate-arg-types keeps typescript 5.8.2 for react-docgen-typescript.
- fixtures/ and packages/cli/templates/ keep typescript 5.8.2
(user-facing); fixture scripts still work because plain `tsc` resolves
to their local dependency.
## vite -> rolldown-vite 7.3.1 (oxc bundler)
- global pnpm override `"vite": "npm:rolldown-vite@^7.3.1"`: the builder
app (remix v2 vite plugin works unmodified), every package vite build
and the storybook build now bundle on rolldown/oxc.
- vitest is scoped BACK to vanilla vite via `vitest>vite`,
`vite-node>vite` and `@vitest/mocker>vite` overrides because vitest
3.1's runner does not understand rolldown's SSR transform
(__vite_ssr_exportName__ ReferenceError in every suite).
- those overrides pin vite EXACTLY to 6.3.4: letting ^6.3.4 float to
6.4.3 breaks cli prebuild tests (dynamic import of a generated
app/routes/$.tsx fails to resolve under 6.4.3's loader).
## unrelated cleanup requested during review
- apps/builder commands.ts imports duplicate-tokens-group statically
instead of via dynamic import. The circular dependency the dynamic
import guarded against only exists through the command-panel barrel
(command-panel.tsx > groups/index.ts > commands-group.tsx >
commands.ts); importing the group module directly is cycle-free
(verified with madge), matching the neighboring wrap-group and
convert-group imports.
## verification
- pnpm lint, oxfmt --check: clean.
- pnpm -r typecheck (TS7 native) and pnpm dts: clean.
- pnpm -r test: all suites pass (builder 2093 tests, cli 630, react-sdk
45, project-build 11, ...).
- builder app build, full workspace build, cli build and storybook build
all succeed on rolldown-vite.
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
0000)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env` file
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This PR expands Webstudio MCP and CLI into a more complete agent
authoring interface. Agents can discover project capabilities, edit real
Webstudio content, use data/resources, verify visual output, and report
useful issues when workflows fail.
## MCP User Capabilities
- Create, update, duplicate, reorder, and delete pages.
- Create pages from templates and manage reusable page templates.
- Inspect project pages, instances, props, styles, assets, variables,
resources, and metadata.
- Insert Webstudio components and authored JSX fragments into pages.
- Edit text, props, styles, breakpoints, design tokens, and CSS
variables.
- Update page metadata, SEO fields, redirects, marketplace metadata, and
project settings.
- Create and use static data variables.
- Create and use dynamic resources fetched over HTTP.
- Use REST, GraphQL, and built-in system resources in authored pages.
- Bind data variables and resources to visible page content.
- Create resource-backed pages such as sitemap XML, structured SEO data,
and API-driven content sections.
- Preview current project state without requiring a publish step.
- Capture screenshots for visual verification.
- Verify responsive designs across desktop, tablet, and mobile
breakpoints.
- Use screenshot diff and OCR-style checks to inspect rendered output.
- Reset and refresh local MCP project state when needed.
- Discover available CLI/MCP commands from generated manuals.
- Use clearer examples for resources, data variables, JSX authoring,
previewing, and visual checks.
- Read marketplace product metadata without requiring a full project
snapshot.
- Get safer guidance when using low-level patch tools.
- Get a ready-to-copy Discord report template when MCP/CLI behavior is
confusing or broken.
## Summary
- Add CLI project import support from synced `.webstudio/data.json` into
another project via a destination share link.
- Move project bundle import/export contract into
`@webstudio-is/protocol`, including bundle versioning, staged upload
constants, schema validation, and fixture coverage.
- Upload project bundle data through staged TUS upload before calling
the import RPC to avoid request body limits.
- Upload referenced assets as binary files through the existing asset
upload route before importing asset rows.
- Add `--skip-assets` and `--ignore-version-check` import options.
- Add retry handling for transient missing imported asset files by
re-uploading only the reported missing assets.
- Share missing-asset import error formatting/parsing through protocol
to avoid duplicated string contracts.
- Preserve browser asset upload behavior while adding API upload
support.
- Normalize schema naming across the branch to lower-case names without
`Schema` suffix.
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
0000)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env` file
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
0000)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env` file
## Description
ref #3994
<img width="409" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/fb00f25b-cf29-4374-8d7d-39fcec26eb9c">
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
0000)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env` file
Here improved our checks. No longet rely on "checks" script but run
"test" and "typescript" scripts from each package in monorepo.
Would also make each package less boilerplaty.
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env` file
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env` file
## Description
Use canary react
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
With new remix setup we may finally not need hoisted linker which makes
pnpm very buggy.
Here added all missing dependencies to package.json and removed node
linker from .npmrc.
dev, build and dts are not necessary in not published packages and can
be removed. Builder vite setup is able to access webstudio export
conditions. Only prisma client need to be built before builder.
This will reduce CI time which runs build many times in various
workflows.
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
Preparation on using std trpc protocol for everything
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
fixes email validation hangs
https://github.com/colinhacks/zod/issues/2580
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
## Description
1. What is this PR about (link the issue and add a short description)
## Steps for reproduction
1. click button
2. expect xyz
## Code Review
- [ ] hi @kof, I need you to do
- conceptual review (architecture, feature-correctness)
- detailed review (read every line)
- test it on preview
## Before requesting a review
- [ ] made a self-review
- [ ] added inline comments where things may be not obvious (the "why",
not "what")
## Before merging
- [ ] tested locally and on preview environment (preview dev login:
5de6)
- [ ] updated [test
cases](https://github.com/webstudio-is/webstudio/blob/main/apps/builder/docs/test-cases.md)
document
- [ ] added tests
- [ ] if any new env variables are added, added them to `.env.example`
and the `builder/env-check.js` if mandatory
Oleg Isonen