[smoke-test] Test coverage review: 112 source files, 2 test files (1.8%) #1

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-05-21 01:25:12 +00:00 by Mark · 3 comments

Mark commented

2026-05-21 01:25:12 +00:00

Owner

Smoke Test Review: Mark/kimi_agent_hero_forge_slice_issue

Type: node | Runtime: node
Source files: 112 | Test files: 2 | Coverage: 1.8%

Observations

Frontend: 108 component files in src/
No dedicated test directory found

Risks

⚠️ Low test coverage: 1.8% of source files have tests

Recommendations

Increase test coverage to at least 50%
Install a test framework (vitest recommended for Vite projects)

Auto-filed by project-smoke-test.py on 2026-05-21 01:25:12 UTC

## Smoke Test Review: Mark/kimi_agent_hero_forge_slice_issue **Type:** node | **Runtime:** node **Source files:** 112 | **Test files:** 2 | **Coverage:** 1.8% ### Observations - Frontend: 108 component files in src/ - No dedicated test directory found ### Risks - ⚠️ Low test coverage: 1.8% of source files have tests ### Recommendations - Increase test coverage to at least 50% - Install a test framework (vitest recommended for Vite projects) --- _Auto-filed by project-smoke-test.py on 2026-05-21 01:25:12 UTC_

Mark added the

blocked:needs-decision

label

2026-05-21 01:25:12 +00:00

Mark commented

2026-05-23 23:04:45 +00:00

Author

Owner

⏸ Needs Decision

Blocking factors:

Large scope — may need decomposition into phased sub-issues
Spec misaligned — doesn't align with project direction

Scope: large Risk: low Spec: misaligned Type: chore
Summary: Auto-filed smoke test report flagging 1.8% test coverage on 58 source files with no existing test infrastructure
Suggestion: Flag for manual review. If approved, start minimally: install vitest + @testing-library/react + happy-dom, write a vitest.config.ts, and target the layer with the most logic first (Zustand store in store.ts, hooks, lib/utils.ts) before attempting 50% UI coverage which requires complex Three.js/R3F mocking. The full 50% target is multi-session work.
Rationale: scope=large: hitting 50% coverage on 58 files across 6 page directories + 40 shadcn/ui components is 20+ test files and requires complex R3F mocking (react-three-fiber cannot render in jsdom without extensive mocks). risk=low: tests are purely additive, no production paths touched. spec=misaligned: no AGENTS.md, CONTEXT.md, .hermes/plans, or any project milestone defining testing as a goal; project is in early development where test investment is a conscious call the owner should make, not an auto-triage decision. type=chore: this is infrastructure/maintenance work, not a feature or bug. summary: there are actually 0 test files (the smoke test claimed 2 but none exist), no testing dependencies in package.json, no test script, and no vitest/jest config — the chart is blank, making this effectively a greenfield testing initiative, not an incremental improvement.

Action: Review each blocking factor above. Remove blocked:needs-decision label to route back to triage.

## ⏸ Needs Decision **Blocking factors:** - **Large scope** — may need decomposition into phased sub-issues - **Spec misaligned** — doesn't align with project direction --- **Scope:** large **Risk:** low **Spec:** misaligned **Type:** chore **Summary:** Auto-filed smoke test report flagging 1.8% test coverage on 58 source files with no existing test infrastructure **Suggestion:** Flag for manual review. If approved, start minimally: install vitest + @testing-library/react + happy-dom, write a vitest.config.ts, and target the layer with the most logic first (Zustand store in store.ts, hooks, lib/utils.ts) before attempting 50% UI coverage which requires complex Three.js/R3F mocking. The full 50% target is multi-session work. **Rationale:** scope=large: hitting 50% coverage on 58 files across 6 page directories + 40 shadcn/ui components is 20+ test files and requires complex R3F mocking (react-three-fiber cannot render in jsdom without extensive mocks). risk=low: tests are purely additive, no production paths touched. spec=misaligned: no AGENTS.md, CONTEXT.md, .hermes/plans, or any project milestone defining testing as a goal; project is in early development where test investment is a conscious call the owner should make, not an auto-triage decision. type=chore: this is infrastructure/maintenance work, not a feature or bug. summary: there are actually 0 test files (the smoke test claimed 2 but none exist), no testing dependencies in package.json, no test script, and no vitest/jest config — the chart is blank, making this effectively a greenfield testing initiative, not an incremental improvement. **Action:** Review each blocking factor above. Remove `blocked:needs-decision` label to route back to triage.

Mark added

triage-approved

and removed

blocked:needs-decision

labels

2026-05-27 00:55:55 +00:00

Mark commented

2026-05-27 00:55:55 +00:00

Author

Owner

Approved. Smoke-test coverage review — always auto-approved per triage rules. Added triage-approved label (created on this repo).

**Approved.** Smoke-test coverage review — always auto-approved per triage rules. Added `triage-approved` label (created on this repo).