hurui200320
2005b8ef82
CI / push-validation (push) Successful in 18s
CI / build (push) Successful in 19s
CI / helm (push) Successful in 24s
CI / lint (push) Successful in 29s
CI / security (push) Successful in 1m11s
CI / e2e_tests (push) Successful in 2m56s
CI / quality (push) Successful in 3m40s
CI / typecheck (push) Successful in 3m59s
CI / integration_tests (push) Successful in 4m3s
CI / unit_tests (push) Successful in 4m55s
CI / docker (push) Successful in 10s
CI / coverage (push) Successful in 10m44s
CI / status-check (push) Successful in 1s
CI / benchmark-regression (push) Has been skipped
CI / benchmark-publish (push) Successful in 1h13m28s
## Summary Replaces all 234 bare `@skip` occurrences across 82 Behave feature files with the correct TDD issue-capture tagging system described in CONTRIBUTING.md § Bug Fix Workflow. Previously, the noxfile ran Behave with `--tags=not @skip`, silently excluding all `@skip`-tagged scenarios from every CI run. These tests never ran, never inverted results via the `@tdd_expected_fail` mechanism, and never contributed to coverage — defeating the purpose of TDD issue-capture testing. Every `@skip` occurrence had a commented-out hint line immediately above it showing the intended proper tags (e.g., `# @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_4272 @tdd_expected_fail @skip`), confirming they were all intended for conversion. ## Changes ### Mechanical conversion (234 replacements across 82 files) - Extracted the proper TDD tags from the comment hint above each `@skip` line, removed `@skip` from the tag set, and replaced the `@skip` line with those tags. - Removed the now-redundant comment hint lines alongside each replacement. ### Bug-fixed scenarios — `@tdd_expected_fail` removed (84 scenarios) - After conversion, ran `nox -s unit_tests` to identify which newly-enabled `@tdd_expected_fail` scenarios now **pass** (their referenced bugs have already been fixed). Removed `@tdd_expected_fail` from those 84 scenarios and their corresponding feature-level tags, leaving only the permanent `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_<N>` regression-guard tags. - Affected features include: `tdd_tool_runner_env_precedence`, `tdd_automation_profile_session_leak`, `tls_certificate_check`, `project_create_persist`, `resource_type_bootstrap_*`, and 18 others. ### Noxfile cleanup - Removed all four `--tags=not @skip` arguments from `noxfile.py` (unit_tests and coverage sessions). With zero `@skip` tags remaining in the codebase, this filter was dead code and its presence would mislead future maintainers into thinking `@skip` is still a supported escape mechanism. ### Regression guard files - Split the regression guards into two focused files: - `tdd_regression_guards_exec_env.feature` for bug #4281 (exec-env precedence) - `tdd_regression_guards_session_list.feature` for bug #4271 (session list summary) - Each file carries only its own `@tdd_issue` tags at the feature level, avoiding cross-contamination via Behave tag inheritance. The `Background` step (`session-list-summary mock`) only appears in the session-list file where it is actually needed. ### Duplicate tag cleanup - Removed duplicate `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_4287` tag lines in `tdd_skill_add_regression.feature` (lines 20 and 29). ### Inline comment for retained `@tdd_expected_fail` - Added inline comment in `ci_workflow_validation.feature:134` explaining why this specific #4227 scenario retains `@tdd_expected_fail` despite #4227 being closed (CI YAML does not encode threshold as a machine-readable value). ### Known edge cases — `@tdd_expected_fail` retained (closed issues, fix on master, scenarios still fail) The following issues are **closed** and their fixes **are on master**, but the specific test assertions still fail because the fixes address other aspects of the bugs. The `@tdd_expected_fail` tags are functionally correct and must remain until the specific scenario assertions pass: - `tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature` — bug #1080 (closed 2026-03-31). The precedence-level-2-vs-4 scenario still fails. - `session_list_summary_dedup.feature` — bug #3046 (closed 2026-04-05). The dedup-consistency scenarios still fail. - `actor_add_update_enforcement.feature` — bug #2609 (closed 2026-04-05). The enforcement scenarios still fail. - `ci_workflow_validation.feature:134` — #4227 (closed 2026-04-08). The CI YAML threshold assertion still fails. ## Verification - `grep -r "@skip" features/ --include="*.feature"` → **zero results** ✓ - `grep -n "tags=not @skip" noxfile.py` → **zero results** ✓ - `nox -s unit_tests` → **629 features passed, 0 failed** ✓ (up from ~545 before this PR) - CI all green (coverage ≥ 97%) ✓ - Integration tests (Robot Framework) do not use `@skip` — confirmed no action needed ✓ - E2E tests (Robot Framework) do not use `@skip` — confirmed no action needed ✓ - `CHANGELOG.md` updated with entry for this change ✓ - `CONTRIBUTORS.md` — Rui Hu already listed ✓ ## Issues Addressed Closes #7025 Co-authored-by: CleverThis <hal9000@cleverthis.com> Reviewed-on: #7221 Reviewed-by: HAL 9000 <HAL9000@cleverthis.com> Reviewed-by: HAL9001 <hal9001@cleverthis.com> Co-authored-by: Rui Hu <rui.hu@cleverthis.com> Co-committed-by: Rui Hu <rui.hu@cleverthis.com>
115 lines
4.6 KiB
Gherkin
115 lines
4.6 KiB
Gherkin
Feature: CLI output formats parity
|
|
As a developer using the CleverAgents CLI
|
|
I want all action and plan commands to support --format json|yaml|plain|table|rich
|
|
So that I can integrate CLI output with external tooling
|
|
|
|
Background:
|
|
Given a CLI output format test runner
|
|
And a mocked lifecycle service for format tests
|
|
|
|
# Action list --format json
|
|
Scenario: Action list outputs valid JSON
|
|
Given there are actions for format testing
|
|
When I run action list with --format json
|
|
Then the output should be valid JSON
|
|
And the JSON should contain key "namespaced_name"
|
|
|
|
# Action show --format yaml
|
|
Scenario: Action show outputs valid YAML
|
|
Given there is a single action for format testing
|
|
When I run action show with --format yaml
|
|
Then the output should be valid YAML
|
|
And the YAML should contain key "namespaced_name"
|
|
|
|
# Plan list --format json
|
|
Scenario: Plan list outputs valid JSON
|
|
Given there are plans for format testing
|
|
When I run plan list with --format json
|
|
Then the output should be valid JSON
|
|
And the JSON should contain key "plan_id"
|
|
|
|
# Plan status --format json (single plan)
|
|
Scenario: Plan status single plan outputs valid JSON
|
|
Given there is a single plan for format testing
|
|
When I run plan status with plan id and --format json
|
|
Then the output should be valid JSON
|
|
And the JSON should contain key "processing_state"
|
|
|
|
# Plan status --format plain (single plan)
|
|
Scenario: Plan status single plan outputs plain text
|
|
Given there is a single plan for format testing
|
|
When I run plan status with plan id and --format plain
|
|
Then the format output should contain "plan_id:"
|
|
And the format output should contain "processing_state:"
|
|
|
|
# Action list --format table
|
|
Scenario: Action list outputs table format
|
|
Given there are actions for format testing
|
|
When I run action list with --format table
|
|
Then the format output should contain "namespaced_name"
|
|
|
|
# Action list --format plain
|
|
Scenario: Action list outputs plain format
|
|
Given there are actions for format testing
|
|
When I run action list with --format plain
|
|
Then the format output should contain "namespaced_name:"
|
|
|
|
# Action archive --format json
|
|
Scenario: Action archive outputs valid JSON
|
|
Given there is an archivable action for format testing
|
|
When I run action archive with --format json
|
|
Then the output should be valid JSON
|
|
And the JSON should contain key "archived"
|
|
|
|
# Plan status list all --format json
|
|
Scenario: Plan status no args outputs valid JSON for list
|
|
Given there are plans for format status listing
|
|
When I run plan status without id and --format json
|
|
Then the output should be valid JSON
|
|
And the JSON should contain key "plan_id"
|
|
|
|
# Plan use --format json
|
|
Scenario: Plan use outputs valid JSON
|
|
Given there is an action for plan use format test
|
|
When I run plan use with --format json
|
|
Then the output should be valid JSON
|
|
And the JSON should contain key "plan_id"
|
|
|
|
# Plan cancel --format json
|
|
Scenario: Plan cancel outputs valid JSON
|
|
Given there is a plan for cancel format test
|
|
When I run plan cancel with --format json
|
|
Then the output should be valid JSON
|
|
And the JSON should contain key "processing_state"
|
|
|
|
# Format consistency: same data, different renders
|
|
Scenario: JSON and YAML contain the same action keys
|
|
Given there is a single action for format testing
|
|
When I run action show with --format json
|
|
And I save the output keys as json_keys
|
|
And I run action show with --format yaml
|
|
And I save the output keys as yaml_keys
|
|
Then json_keys and yaml_keys should match
|
|
|
|
# Direct formatting module tests
|
|
@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_4364 @tdd_expected_fail
|
|
Scenario: Format output handles all format types for dict
|
|
When I call format_output with a dict and format json
|
|
Then the format result should be valid JSON dict
|
|
When I call format_output with a dict and format yaml
|
|
Then the format result should be valid YAML dict
|
|
When I call format_output with a dict and format plain
|
|
Then the format result should contain plain key-value pairs
|
|
When I call format_output with a dict and format table
|
|
Then the format result should contain table output
|
|
When I call format_output with a dict and format rich
|
|
Then the format result should be valid JSON dict
|
|
|
|
Scenario: Format output handles list data
|
|
When I call format_output with a list and format plain
|
|
Then the format result should contain separator lines
|
|
|
|
Scenario: Serialize value handles enums and nested dicts
|
|
When I call serialize_value with enum and nested data
|
|
Then the serialized result should have string enum values
|