chore(deps): update dependencies

[sriramveeraghanta]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated package manager to pnpm 10.32.1 to align with newer tooling and installs.
  • Added a top-level pnpm override to pin esbuild to ^0.25.0, ensuring a consistent build tool version across environments.

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 0cc6f2b7-1347-44c8-9e96-90773847eac1

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 87407a8 and 7a94c1c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• package.json

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Updated package.json: bumped the packageManager string from pnpm@10.28.2... to pnpm@10.32.1... and added a top-level pnpm object with an overrides entry pinning esbuild to ^0.25.0.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Package manifest package.json	Updated packageManager value (pnpm 10.28.2 → 10.32.1 with new checksum) and added pnpm.overrides to force esbuild → ^0.25.0.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 A tiny hop, a version bump so neat,
pnpm steps up with a confident beat,
esbuild tucked in, pinned and snug,
I cheer from my burrow with a happy shrug.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title check	❓ Inconclusive	The title 'chore(deps): update dependencies' is generic and vague, using non-descriptive language that doesn't convey specific information about what was actually changed in the pull request.	Consider updating the title to be more specific, such as 'chore(deps): update pnpm to 10.32.1 and add esbuild override' to better describe the actual changes made.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch chore-deps-upgrade

📝 Coding Plan

• Generate coding plan for human review comments

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[vercel]

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

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
docs	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 17, 2026 6:50pm

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@package.json`:
- Around line 35-40: The package.json formatting is failing the oxfmt check; run
the formatter (oxfmt --write .) to normalize the JSON around the "pnpm"
overrides and "packageManager" entries, then commit the updated package.json so
CI passes the oxfmt --check step.

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 0a256af0-f33c-442e-8a7e-0f0460e56ce5

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1036dc0 and 87407a8.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)

• pnpm-lock.yaml is excluded by !**/pnpm-lock.yaml

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• package.json