Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently, the validation logic on the Create and Review pages of the rule creation wizard is partially implemented in reviewValidation.tsx.
However, several important validation scenarios (as shown in Joey’s design) are missing. This can cause users to create conflicting or ambiguous rules without clear feedback.
Describe the solution you'd like
Add enhanced validation for all rule configuration scenarios described in the design annotations.
Specifically, validation should handle the following cases:
Scenario 2 — Logical Conflict
- Detect when a new rule has identical match criteria to an existing rule (same path/method) but different filters or backend references.
- Display a warning (Rule conflicted) in the Review step.
- Include a tooltip explaining which rule it conflicts with.
- Allow user to continue, but show an “Error” status later in the table view.
Scenario 3 — Ambiguous Mapping
- Detect when a single rule includes multiple matches and multiple backends, making routing ambiguous.
- Display a warning (Rule ambiguous) suggesting the user split matches and backends into separate rules for better precision.
Scenario 4 — Rule Duplicated
- Detect when the user creates a rule identical to an existing one (same matches, filters, and backend references).
- Allow the user to complete creation, but mark the rule with an Error status in the table view later.
Additional context
UI microcopy: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-1SnCAGEG-dyasLqo7Bq89QrWcTMuM8PzVQY1iFmtsQ/edit?tab=t.0
Figma: https://www.figma.com/design/HnY6prXBgIn82Tlrtsg6ou/RHCL-OCP-dynamic-plugin?node-id=5497-115791&t=pf7EGLUbQcKIbOq6-1
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently, the validation logic on the Create and Review pages of the rule creation wizard is partially implemented in reviewValidation.tsx.
However, several important validation scenarios (as shown in Joey’s design) are missing. This can cause users to create conflicting or ambiguous rules without clear feedback.
Describe the solution you'd like
Add enhanced validation for all rule configuration scenarios described in the design annotations.
Specifically, validation should handle the following cases:
Scenario 2 — Logical Conflict
Scenario 3 — Ambiguous Mapping
Scenario 4 — Rule Duplicated
Additional context
Design annotations: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1z4Wr1nLISYPwgDp9TbGKmimRo0SowJFStQHKfkW9Z1k/edit?slide=id.g341b4158b3f_0_2767#slide=id.g341b4158b3f_0_2767
UI microcopy: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-1SnCAGEG-dyasLqo7Bq89QrWcTMuM8PzVQY1iFmtsQ/edit?tab=t.0
Figma: https://www.figma.com/design/HnY6prXBgIn82Tlrtsg6ou/RHCL-OCP-dynamic-plugin?node-id=5497-115791&t=pf7EGLUbQcKIbOq6-1