[smoke-test] Test coverage review: 91 source files, 9 test files (9.9%) #27

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-05-15 19:03:23 +00:00 by Mark · 2 comments

Mark commented

2026-05-15 19:03:23 +00:00

Owner

Smoke Test Review: Mark/GSD2_agent

Type: node | Runtime: node
Source files: 91 | Test files: 9 | Coverage: 9.9%

Observations

Frontend: 86 component files in src/
No dedicated test directory found

Risks

⚠️ Low test coverage: 9.9% of source files have tests

Recommendations

Increase test coverage to at least 50%

Auto-filed by project-smoke-test.py on 2026-05-15 19:03:23 UTC

## Smoke Test Review: Mark/GSD2_agent **Type:** node | **Runtime:** node **Source files:** 91 | **Test files:** 9 | **Coverage:** 9.9% ### Observations - Frontend: 86 component files in src/ - No dedicated test directory found ### Risks - ⚠️ Low test coverage: 9.9% of source files have tests ### Recommendations - Increase test coverage to at least 50% --- _Auto-filed by project-smoke-test.py on 2026-05-15 19:03:23 UTC_

Mark added the

blocked:needs-decision

label

2026-05-15 19:03:23 +00:00

Mark commented

2026-05-15 19:09:51 +00:00

Author

Owner

Feature Triage Assessment

Scope: large
Risk: low
Spec Alignment: aligned
Summary: Requests increasing test coverage from 9.9% to at least 50% by adding test files for approximately 37+ source files that currently lack coverage.
Recommendation: Start with critical path tests — wizard state/hooks (useWizard.tsx), lib utilities (llm.ts, oauth.ts, git.ts), and types — using existing Vitest + React Testing Library setup. Add a coverage config threshold in vitest.config.ts and set up CI gates to prevent regression. Work incrementally by module rather than trying to hit 50% in one pass.
Rationale: Large scope because reaching 50% file-level coverage requires ~37 new test files across components, hooks, lib, and types — a multi-session effort. Low risk since adding tests is purely additive, doesn't modify production code, and the testing infrastructure (Vitest, src/test/ directory, test commands) already exists in the project. Spec-aligned because the project already defines test commands (test:run, test:coverage) and has a test directory, so this fills an existing gap rather than introducing new direction.

Labeled blocked:needs-decision — unblock on Forgejo to dispatch to the fixer pipeline.

## Feature Triage Assessment **Scope:** large **Risk:** low **Spec Alignment:** aligned **Summary:** Requests increasing test coverage from 9.9% to at least 50% by adding test files for approximately 37+ source files that currently lack coverage. **Recommendation:** Start with critical path tests — wizard state/hooks (useWizard.tsx), lib utilities (llm.ts, oauth.ts, git.ts), and types — using existing Vitest + React Testing Library setup. Add a coverage config threshold in vitest.config.ts and set up CI gates to prevent regression. Work incrementally by module rather than trying to hit 50% in one pass. **Rationale:** Large scope because reaching 50% file-level coverage requires ~37 new test files across components, hooks, lib, and types — a multi-session effort. Low risk since adding tests is purely additive, doesn't modify production code, and the testing infrastructure (Vitest, src/test/ directory, test commands) already exists in the project. Spec-aligned because the project already defines test commands (test:run, test:coverage) and has a test directory, so this fills an existing gap rather than introducing new direction. Labeled `blocked:needs-decision` — unblock on Forgejo to dispatch to the fixer pipeline.

Mark added the

quickfix

triage-approved

labels

2026-05-17 23:29:22 +00:00

Mark removed the

triage-approved

label

2026-05-19 03:03:46 +00:00

Mark commented

2026-05-20 01:26:05 +00:00

Author