ZenStack Relation Naming Discovery

Problem

When working with ZenStack (enhanced Prisma), the actual relation field names on model instances don't always match what you expect from reading the schema. This causes TypeScript errors and runtime failures when accessing related data.

Common scenario: Schema defines verificationRecord VerificationRecord? but the actual field name is verification, not verificationRecord.

Context / Trigger Conditions

Use this pattern when you encounter:

1. •

   TypeScript errors like:

   code

   Property 'verificationRecord' does not exist on type 'User'
   Property 'documentsOwned' does not exist on type 'User'
   

2. •

   Runtime errors when accessing relations:

   code

   Cannot read property 'status' of undefined
   

3. •

   Implementing new queries that need to include related data and you're unsure of the exact field names

Solution

Step 1: Check the Schema Definition

Look at the schema in packages/database/zenstack/schema.zmodel (or .prisma file):

model User {
  id String @id
  verification VerificationRecord?  // ← Note the field name here
  documents Document[]               // ← And here
}

model VerificationRecord {
  id String @id
  userId String @unique
  user User @relation(fields: [userId], references: [id])
}

Key insight: The relation field name is determined by:

• •Explicit name in schema: verification VerificationRecord? → field name is verification
• •Not the type name: The type VerificationRecord doesn't determine the field name

Step 2: Verify with Generated Types

Check the generated TypeScript types in packages/database/zenstack/models.ts:

// Search for your model
export type User = {
  id: string;
  verification?: VerificationRecord | null;  // ← Actual field name
  documents: Document[];                     // ← Actual field name
}

This shows the exact field names available on instances.

Step 3: Test with a Database Query (if still unsure)

Write a simple query to see what's actually available:

const user = await db.user.findUnique({
  where: { id: 'some-id' },
  include: {
    verification: true,  // Try the suspected name
    documents: true
  }
});

console.log(Object.keys(user)); // See all available fields

Step 4: Update Your Code

Use the actual field names from the schema/types:

// ❌ WRONG (assumed names)
const status = instructor.verificationRecord?.status;
const docs = instructor.documentsOwned;

// ✅ CORRECT (actual schema names)
const status = instructor.verification?.status;
const docs = instructor.documents;

Verification

After using the correct field names:

• •✅ TypeScript errors disappear
• •✅ Queries execute without runtime errors
• •✅ Related data is properly accessed

Example

Scenario: Implementing admin verification UI, need to access instructor's verification record and documents.

Initial attempt (based on assumptions):

const instructor = await baseDB.user.findUnique({
  where: { id: instructorId },
  include: {
    verificationRecord: true,  // ❌ Doesn't exist
    documentsOwned: true,       // ❌ Doesn't exist
  },
});

After schema discovery:

const instructor = await baseDB.user.findUnique({
  where: { id: instructorId },
  include: {
    verification: true,  // ✅ Correct name from schema
    documents: true,     // ✅ Correct name from schema
  },
});

Common Patterns

One-to-One Relations

model User {
  profile Profile?  // ← Field name: "profile"
}

// Access: user.profile (not user.userProfile)

One-to-Many Relations

model User {
  vehicles Vehicle[]  // ← Field name: "vehicles"
}

// Access: user.vehicles (not user.vehiclesOwned)

Many-to-Many Relations

model User {
  languages UserLanguage[]  // ← Field name: "languages"
}

// Access: user.languages (not user.userLanguages)

Relations with Type Tables

model Profile {
  type ProfileType @relation(fields: [typeId], references: [id])
}

// Access: profile.type (not profile.profileType)

Notes

• •Schema is source of truth: The field name in the schema definition is the actual field name on instances
• •Type name ≠ Field name: verification VerificationRecord? creates a field called verification, not verificationRecord
• •Prisma conventions: Prisma (and ZenStack) follow these naming rules consistently
• •Generated types are reliable: Always check models.ts when in doubt
• •Include syntax matches: The include object uses the same field names as schema

References

• •Prisma Relations Documentation
• •ZenStack ZModel Language Reference
• •Prisma Naming Conventions Discussion
• •Custom Model and Field Names | Prisma