Frontend UX, TanStack Query and Form Integration TaskFlow - Full Stack Developer 2026
UI responsibilities • Validate obvious type/size issues before requesting an intent.
• Show selected filename and human-readable size.
• Show transfer progress for TUS uploads.
• Distinguish uploading from finalizing.
• Allow retry without creating uncontrolled duplicate records.
• Announce errors and progress accessibly.
Mutation lifecycle
const uploadAttachment = useMutation({
mutationFn: async (file: File) => {
const intent = await createAttachmentIntent(taskId, file)
await uploadFile(intent, file, setProgress)
return completeAttachment(intent.attachment.id)
},onSuccess: async () => {
await queryClient.invalidateQueries({
queryKey: attachmentKeys.list(taskId),
})
},
})State ownership • Selected File and progress: local component/mutation UI state.
• Attachment list: TanStack Query server state.
• Upload policy: shared display hints may exist client-side, but NestJS and bucket restrictions remain authoritative.
• Original filename field: display metadata, not a storage key.
Accessibility Use a real file input with a programmatic label, provide text progress in addition to a visual bar, and announce success/failure through a polite status region. Do not communicate upload state only by color.
TanStack Query is a server-state synchronization system, not merely a fetch helper. Cache identity, freshness, invalidation, and mutation semantics are the core model.
Restate the goal of “Frontend UX TanStack Query and Form Integration” as one observable behavior. Write the success signal before touching code.
Trace the boundary map: component → query key → cache state → fetch/mutation → reconciliation. Mark the one boundary this lesson changes.
Inspect the current repository state and record the exact files, route, table, or runtime involved. Avoid creating an abstraction before you can name the existing owner.
Implement the smallest vertical slice. Add one coherent change, run the narrowest verification command, and read the output before continuing.
Connect the slice to TaskFlow’s phase artifact: Task attachment upload/download/delete workflow using Supabase Storage plus application metadata.. Verify behavior from the outside as a user or API client would.
Create one controlled failure that is safe to reproduce. Predict the symptom first, capture evidence, locate the earliest broken boundary, then fix only that cause.
Close the reference and rebuild or explain the core change from memory. Record what you would monitor or test before trusting the same change in production.
export const taskKeys = {
all: ["tasks"] as const,
list: (filters: TaskFilters) => ["tasks", "list", filters] as const,
detail: (id: string) => ["tasks", "detail", id] as const,
};Do not copy this as a finished answer. Predict what each boundary does, type the smallest useful slice, run it, then compare the result with your prediction.
Return to the nearest observable boundary: input, network, process log, database, or rendered UI. Compare actual evidence with the predicted path.
Change one variable at a time and reproduce the original failure after the fix; otherwise you have correlation, not diagnosis.
Without copying the final source, create a second small scenario that applies “Frontend UX TanStack Query and Form Integration” to a different TaskFlow resource or input. Write the acceptance criteria first, implement it, and provide the evidence that each criterion is satisfied.
Generate time-limited access for private objects and test outsider access denial.
Use the smallest change that demonstrates this lesson. Stop after it works and capture evidence.User-controlled storage path enabling cross-tenant overwrite
Predict the symptom before causing the failure. Then locate the earliest boundary where reality diverges from expectation.Why does this responsibility live here, what input does it trust, what output proves success, and what would go wrong if another layer owned it?
If your explanation is vague, repeat the boundary trace before moving on.Close the reference. Reproduce the core idea from memory or explain the exact request/data flow aloud. Then check your diff or notes for accidental shortcuts that bypass validation, authorization, error handling, or verification earned in earlier phases.