cleveragents-core/docs/development/testing.md

Testing Guide

Overview

CleverAgents uses a comprehensive testing strategy with three complementary frameworks:

• Behave (BDD/Gherkin) for unit-level and scenario tests under features/
• Robot Framework for integration and end-to-end tests under robot/
• ASV (airspeed velocity) for performance benchmarks under benchmarks/
• Coverage: coverage.py with branch coverage, enforced at >=97%

All tests are executed exclusively through nox sessions. Never invoke behave, robot, or other test runners directly.

Running Tests

# Run all default sessions (lint, typecheck, unit tests, integration tests, coverage)
nox

# Unit tests only (Behave)
nox -s unit_tests

# Integration tests only (Robot Framework)
nox -s integration_tests

# Coverage report with 97% enforcement
nox -s coverage_report

# Run a specific feature file
nox -s unit_tests -- features/plan_model.feature

# Benchmarks (ASV)
nox -s benchmark

# Type checking (pyright)
nox -s typecheck

# Linting (ruff)
nox -s lint

# Formatting check
nox -s format -- --check

Coverage Requirements

Threshold: 97%

The project enforces a minimum 97% code coverage at all times. This is a hard gate:

• The nox -s coverage_report session fails if coverage drops below 97%.
• The Forgejo CI coverage job runs nox -s coverage_report and blocks merges on failure.
• Branch coverage is enabled (branch = true in pyproject.toml).

How Coverage Is Measured

Coverage is measured by running Behave tests under coverage.py in serial mode:

coverage run --source=src -m behave -q --tags=-discovery --no-capture features/
coverage report --show-missing --fail-under=97

Coverage Output

On success, the nox session emits:

COVERAGE OK: 97.2% (threshold: 97%)

On failure, the nox session emits and exits non-zero:

COVERAGE FAILED: 95.3% < 97% threshold

Both messages are single-line and CI-parseable. The CI pipeline greps for these lines to surface them in job summaries.

Coverage Reports

Three report formats are generated under build/:

Report	Path	Description
Terminal	stdout	Per-file summary with --show-missing
HTML	build/htmlcov/index.html	Interactive browser report
XML	build/coverage.xml	Cobertura-format for CI tools
JSON	build/coverage.json	Machine-readable totals and per-file data

Coverage Configuration

Coverage settings live in pyproject.toml:

[tool.coverage.run]
source = ["src", "scripts"]
branch = true
parallel = false
omit = [
    "*/tests/*",
    "*/test_*",
    "features/*",
    "*/features/*",
    "*/__pycache__/*",
    "*/site-packages/*",
    "*/dependency_injector/*",
    "*/venv/*",
    "*/.venv/*",
    "*/.nox/*",
    "src/cleveragents/discovery/*",
]
data_file = "build/.coverage"

[tool.coverage.html]
directory = "build/htmlcov"

[tool.coverage.xml]
output = "build/coverage.xml"

The --fail-under=97 threshold is enforced in the coverage_report nox session (noxfile.py).

How to Improve Coverage

1. Run nox -s coverage_report to generate the HTML report.
2. Open build/htmlcov/index.html in a browser to identify uncovered files.
3. Sort by "Missing" column to find files with the most uncovered lines.
4. Write Behave scenarios targeting the uncovered code paths.
5. Re-run nox -s coverage_report to verify improvement.

Do not lower the threshold, add # pragma: no cover comments, or expand the omit list without explicit team agreement.

All test files go under features/ (Behave) or robot/ (Robot Framework). Never create a tests/ directory.

Unit Tests (Behave)

Unit tests use the Behave BDD framework with Gherkin-syntax .feature files.

Structure

features/
  *.feature          # Feature files (Gherkin scenarios)
  steps/             # Step definitions (Python)
  mocks/             # Mock implementations (test doubles)
  fixtures/          # Test fixture data
  environment.py     # Behave hooks (before/after scenario, etc.)

Guidelines

• No pytest: All unit tests must be Behave-based. There is intentionally no tests/ directory.
• Step naming: Use unique, descriptive step names. Behave loads all step files globally; ambiguous steps cause AmbiguousStep errors.
• Feature naming: Name feature-specific step files after their feature (e.g., foo.feature -> foo_steps.py).
• Mocks in features/ only: All mock implementations live in features/mocks/. Production code (src/) must never contain test doubles.

Running Specific Features

# Run a single feature file
nox -s unit_tests -- features/plan_model.feature

# Run scenarios with a specific tag
nox -s unit_tests -- --tags=@smoke

Integration Tests (Robot Framework)

Integration tests use Robot Framework for end-to-end and system-level testing.

Structure

robot/
  *.robot            # Test suites
  *.resource         # Shared keywords and variables
  common.resource    # Common setup/teardown keywords
  v2_paths.resource  # Path configuration

Guidelines

• Resource paths: Always use ${CURDIR}/ prefix for Resource imports (e.g., Resource ${CURDIR}/common.resource).
• Python injection: Use ${PYTHON} variable (injected by nox) instead of bare python in Run Process calls.
• Timeouts: Always add timeout= to Run Process calls that invoke long-running commands.
• Slow tests: Tag tests that require external services (API keys, running servers) with slow. These are excluded in CI via --exclude slow.

Running Specific Suites

# Run a single Robot suite
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/plan_generation_graph.robot

# Include slow tests
nox -s slow_integration_tests

Performance Benchmarks (ASV)

ASV (airspeed velocity) tracks performance over time.

Structure

benchmarks/
  *.py               # Benchmark suites (Time*/Mem*/Track* classes)
asv.conf.json        # ASV configuration

Running Benchmarks

nox -s benchmark

Writing Effective Tests

Behave Test Guidelines

Feature: Plan lifecycle transitions

  Scenario: Execute plan transitions phase from strategize to execute
    Given an action "local/build-app" exists
    And a plan is created using "local/build-app" on project "local/my-project"
    And strategize is completed
    When I execute the plan
    Then the plan phase should be "execute"
    And the processing state should be "queued"

Robot Framework Guidelines

*** Settings ***
Documentation     Plan lifecycle integration tests
Library           Process
Library           OperatingSystem
Resource          ${CURDIR}/common.resource

*** Test Cases ***
Plan Execute Transitions Correctly
    [Documentation]    Verify execute phase transition via CLI
    ${result}=    Run Process    ${PYTHON}    -m    cleveragents    plan    execute    ${PLAN_ID}
    Should Be Equal As Integers    ${result.rc}    0
    Should Contain    ${result.stdout}    execute

CLI Lifecycle Test Suites

The CLI lifecycle suites provide comprehensive coverage for action and plan lifecycle commands, including success paths, error paths, multi-project arguments, automation profile overrides, invariants, actor overrides, phase visibility, and terminal outcomes.

Behave Suite: features/cli_lifecycle_coverage.feature

Covers 68 scenarios across these areas:

Area	Scenarios	Description
Action CRUD	13	create, list, show, archive with success + error paths
Plan Use	10	basic use, multi-project, automation profile, invariants, actor overrides
Plan Status	9	phase visibility (strategize, execute, apply) and terminal outcomes (applied, constrained, errored, cancelled)
Plan Execute	5	execute success, phase transition, error paths
Plan Apply	5	lifecycle-apply success, terminal outcomes, error paths
Plan Cancel	5	cancel with reason, already-terminal guard, error paths
Plan List	4	lifecycle-list with and without filters
Negative cases	17	missing config, invalid args, invalid project names, unknown actions/resources

Step definitions: features/steps/cli_lifecycle_coverage_steps.py

All step names are prefixed with lifecycle coverage to avoid AmbiguousStep conflicts with existing steps.

Robot Suite: robot/cli_lifecycle_e2e.robot

End-to-end integration tests exercising the full action-to-apply lifecycle through the CLI entry points. Uses robot/helper_cli_lifecycle_e2e.py as a Python helper that mocks the service layer while exercising real CLI argument parsing and output formatting.

Test Case	Description
Action Create From Config Via CLI	Creates an action from YAML config
Plan Use Creates Plan In Strategize Phase	Uses an action to create a plan
Plan Execute Transitions To Execute Phase	Executes a plan, checks phase
Plan Lifecycle Apply Transitions To Apply Phase	Applies a plan, checks phase
Plan Status Shows Plan Details	Verifies status output rendering
Plan Cancel Cancels Non-Terminal Plan	Cancels with a reason string
Full Lifecycle Action To Apply	End-to-end: create -> use -> execute -> apply
Plan Lifecycle List Shows Plans	Verifies lifecycle-list output

ASV Benchmark: benchmarks/plan_cli_smoke_bench.py

Three benchmark suites measuring CLI argument parsing overhead (service layer is mocked so only parsing + routing cost is measured):

• ActionCLIParsingSuite -- time_action_create, time_action_list, time_action_list_with_filters, time_action_show, time_action_archive
• PlanUseArgParsingSuite -- time_use_minimal, time_use_multi_project, time_use_with_all_flags, time_use_with_args_only
• PlanLifecycleCmdParsingSuite -- time_execute, time_lifecycle_apply, time_status_by_id, time_status_list_all, time_cancel_with_reason, time_lifecycle_list, time_lifecycle_list_filtered

Running the CLI Lifecycle Suites

# Behave only (our feature)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/cli_lifecycle_coverage.feature

# Robot only (our suite)
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/cli_lifecycle_e2e.robot

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

Robot Suite: robot/cli_lifecycle.robot

End-to-end Robot suite for the CLI lifecycle with git_worktree sandbox simulation and ChangeSet capture verification. Uses robot/helper_cli_lifecycle.py as a Python helper that exercises the full action → plan → execute → apply flow with mocked service layer, simulated sandbox workspace, and InMemoryChangeSetStore for change tracking.

Positive tests:

Test Case	Description
Action Create Via Config CLI	Creates an action from YAML config
Plan Use Creates Strategize Plan With Sandbox	Uses action with sandbox workspace mock
Plan Execute With ChangeSet Capture	Executes plan, verifies changeset entry recorded
Plan Apply With ChangeSet Verification	Applies plan, verifies changeset summary
Full Lifecycle Action To Apply With Sandbox	End-to-end with sandbox + changeset

Negative tests:

Test Case	Description
Invalid Project Name Rejected	Invalid project name format handled gracefully
Missing Resource Returns Error	Non-existent action returns error
Invalid Arg Format Rejected	--arg without = separator rejected

Fixtures:

• helper_cli_lifecycle.py creates temporary YAML config files and sandbox directories
• Uses InMemoryChangeSetStore for ChangeSet capture without database
• Each subcommand is self-contained; cleanup runs in finally blocks

Aligned Behave feature: features/cli_lifecycle_robot_alignment.feature mirrors the Robot E2E flow to keep unit/integration expectations aligned.

ASV benchmark: benchmarks/cli_robot_flow_bench.py measures fixture setup overhead (CLIRobotFixtureSetupSuite) and full lifecycle CLI throughput (CLIRobotLifecycleSuite).

Running the Robot CLI Lifecycle Suite

# Robot suite
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/cli_lifecycle.robot

# Aligned Behave feature
nox -s unit_tests -- features/cli_lifecycle_robot_alignment.feature

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

Persistence Test Suites

The persistence layer (SQLAlchemy repositories for plans and actions) has dedicated test suites at both unit and integration levels.

Behave: Plan Persistence (features/plan_persistence.feature)

19 scenarios covering LifecyclePlanRepository operations:

• Create: Persist plans via repository, retrieve by ULID, verify all fields round-trip.
• Phase/state transitions: Update phase and processing_state, verify persistence after each transition.
• List filters: Filter plans by phase, processing state, and action name.
• Plan tree links: Parent/child/root hierarchy with parent_plan_id and root_plan_id.
• Cross-restart: Close the SQLite session, reopen from disk, verify plans survive reconnection (including project links, arguments, and invariants).

Step definitions: features/steps/plan_persistence_steps.py

Fixtures: Each scenario gets a fresh temp SQLite database via _setup_db() / _teardown_db() helper functions. The database is file-backed (not :memory:) so cross-restart scenarios can close and reopen the connection.

Behave: Action Persistence (features/action_persistence.feature)

14 scenarios covering ActionRepository operations:

• CRUD: Create, retrieve by namespaced_name, list available, filter by namespace, archive, delete.
• Argument ordering: Persist 3 ActionArgument entries and verify positional order is preserved.
• Invariant ordering: Persist 3 invariant strings and verify order is preserved.
• Terminal state storage: Create plans from actions in Apply phase with each terminal ProcessingState (applied, constrained, errored, cancelled) and verify persistence.

Step definitions: features/steps/action_persistence_steps.py

Robot: Plan Persistence E2E (robot/plan_persistence_e2e.robot)

5 end-to-end tests exercising the persistence layer through Python helper scripts:

Test Case	Description
Plan Full Lifecycle Persistence	Create action + plan, transition through all phases to applied terminal state
Plan Restart Persistence	Create plan, close DB, reopen, verify all fields survive
Plan Concurrent Session Access	Two independent sessions against the same DB file
Action CRUD Persistence E2E	Create, read, update, delete an action with arguments/invariants
Plan Tree Hierarchy Persistence E2E	Parent/child plan hierarchy with root_plan_id verification

Helper script: robot/helper_plan_persistence_e2e.py

Robot: Persistence Lifecycle (robot/persistence_lifecycle.robot)

7 end-to-end tests exercising persistence lifecycle patterns through a Python helper:

Test Case	Description
Plan Full Lifecycle Phase Transitions	Create action + plan, transition through all phases to applied terminal state
Process Restart Simulation	Write plan, close DB, reopen from disk, verify all fields survive
Reopen Plan Status After Restart	Close/reopen, verify phase, state, automation level, and tags unchanged
Concurrent CLI Access Safeguards	Two independent sessions see each other's committed data
Stored Arguments Ordering Persistence	4 ordered ActionArgument entries survive roundtrip
Stored Invariants Ordering Persistence	3 ordered invariant strings survive roundtrip
Project Links Persistence Through Restart	2 ProjectLink entries survive close/reopen cycle

Helper script: robot/helper_persistence_lifecycle.py

Behave: Persistence Robot Alignment (features/persistence_robot_alignment.feature)

1 scenario mirroring the Robot restart-simulation flow to keep unit and integration persistence expectations aligned. Step definitions in features/steps/persistence_robot_alignment_steps.py.

ASV Benchmarks: Robot Fixture Overhead (benchmarks/persistence_robot_bench.py)

Performance baselines for Robot fixture setup operations:

• TimeRobotFixtureSetupSuite.time_file_db_init -- File-backed SQLite init + schema creation
• TimeRobotFixtureSetupSuite.time_seed_action -- Action seeding into a fresh file DB
• TimeRobotFixtureSetupSuite.time_seed_plan -- Plan creation including FK action seeding
• TimeRobotRestartCycleSuite.time_close_reopen_verify -- Close + reopen + get cycle latency

ASV Benchmarks (benchmarks/persistence_suites_bench.py)

Performance baselines for persistence test operations:

• TimePlanPersistenceSuites.time_create_and_retrieve_plan -- Plan round-trip latency
• TimePlanPersistenceSuites.time_phase_state_transition -- Phase/state update cycle
• TimePlanPersistenceSuites.time_list_plans_filtered -- List with filters
• TimePlanPersistenceSuites.time_plan_tree_operations -- Parent/child hierarchy
• TimeActionPersistenceSuites.time_create_and_retrieve_action -- Action round-trip
• TimeActionPersistenceSuites.time_action_arguments_ordering -- Ordered arguments persistence
• TimeActionPersistenceSuites.time_cross_restart_persistence -- Close/reopen cycle

Run with: nox -s benchmark

ASV Benchmarks (benchmarks/decision_persistence_serialization_bench.py)

Performance baselines for decision persistence (serialization round-trip) operations:

• DecisionDumpRoundTripSuite.time_root_dump -- Root decision model_dump
• DecisionDumpRoundTripSuite.time_root_validate -- Root decision model_validate
• DecisionDumpRoundTripSuite.time_root_roundtrip -- Root decision full round-trip
• DecisionDumpRoundTripSuite.time_child_roundtrip -- Child decision full round-trip
• DecisionDumpRoundTripSuite.time_full_roundtrip -- Fully-populated decision round-trip
• DecisionJsonRoundTripSuite.time_root_dump_json -- Root decision model_dump_json
• DecisionJsonRoundTripSuite.time_root_json_roundtrip -- Root decision JSON round-trip
• DecisionJsonRoundTripSuite.time_full_json_roundtrip -- Full decision JSON round-trip
• DecisionJsonRoundTripSuite.time_root_json_validate -- Root decision model_validate from JSON
• DecisionJsonRoundTripSuite.time_full_json_validate -- Full decision model_validate from JSON
• DecisionSnapshotPersistenceSuite.time_empty_snapshot_roundtrip -- Empty snapshot round-trip
• DecisionSnapshotPersistenceSuite.time_small_snapshot_roundtrip -- Small snapshot round-trip
• DecisionSnapshotPersistenceSuite.time_large_snapshot_roundtrip -- Large snapshot (50 resources) round-trip
• DecisionTreeSerializationSuite.time_small_tree_roundtrip -- 3-node tree round-trip
• DecisionTreeSerializationSuite.time_medium_tree_roundtrip -- 7-node tree round-trip
• DecisionTreeSerializationSuite.time_large_tree_roundtrip -- 15-node tree round-trip
• DecisionTreeSerializationSuite.time_large_tree_json_roundtrip -- 15-node tree JSON round-trip

Run with: nox -s benchmark

Behave: Decision Persistence Serialization (features/decision_persistence_serialization.feature)

21 scenarios covering Decision serialization round-trips, context-snapshot persistence, correction-chain reconstruction, and decision-tree reconstruction from serialized data:

• CRUD round-trips: Root and child decisions survive model_dump / model_validate.
• JSON round-trips: Decisions with artifacts survive model_dump_json / model_validate.
• Snapshot persistence: Empty snapshots, snapshots with resources, and actor state refs.
• Correction chains: Correction metadata, superseded_by, and 3-decision chain reconstruction.
• Tree reconstruction: 3-level tree (7 nodes) with parent-link integrity verification.
• Edge cases: Empty alternatives, confidence boundaries (0.0, 1.0, None), all types, long rationale.
• Downstream IDs: downstream_decision_ids and downstream_plan_ids survive round-trip.

Step definitions: features/steps/decision_persistence_serialization_steps.py

Robot Framework: Decision Persistence Serialization (robot/decision_persistence_serialization.robot)

7 integration smoke tests exercising decision persistence round-trips via a helper script (robot/helper_decision_persistence_serialization.py):

• Root decision round-trip
• Child decision round-trip
• Context snapshot persistence
• JSON serialization round-trip
• Correction chain persistence
• Decision tree reconstruction
• All decision types round-trip

Behave: Skill Registry Persistence (features/skill_registry.feature)

23 scenarios covering SkillRepository and SkillRegistryService operations:

• Register: Persist skills with each item type (tool_ref, include, inline_tool, mcp_source, agent_source), verify round-trip.
• Duplicate rejection: Second registration with the same name raises DuplicateSkillError.
• Retrieve / list: Get by name, list all, list with namespace filter.
• Update / remove: Change description, remove with cascade, non-existent skill error paths.
• Overrides round-trip: Override metadata survives persistence.
• Ordering stability: Mixed item types maintain stable item_order across round-trips.
• Name validation: Empty, no-slash, and special-character names rejected at persistence layer.
• Large payload: 50 tool refs persist correctly.
• Domain objects: Listed results are Skill domain instances.

Step definitions: features/steps/skill_registry_steps.py

Fixtures: Each scenario gets a fresh in-memory SQLite database. A single shared Session is reused across all repository calls within each scenario via a lambda session factory (lambda: shared_session). This mirrors the production UnitOfWork pattern (ADR-019) and avoids transaction-scoping issues that arise when multiple ephemeral sessions share one in-memory SQLite connection (StaticPool): abandoned sessions can be garbage-collected at unpredictable times, rolling back previously flushed but uncommitted data.

Robot: Skill Registry (robot/skill_registry.robot)

5 smoke tests exercising the registry through a Python helper script:

Test Case	Description
Register And Retrieve A Skill	Round-trip: register then get by name
List Skills With Namespace Filter	Register multiple skills, filter by namespace
Update A Skill	Change description after registration
Reject Duplicate Skill Name	Duplicate name produces error
Remove A Skill	Remove and verify absence

Helper script: robot/helper_skill_registry.py

ASV Benchmarks: Skill Registry (benchmarks/skill_registry_bench.py)

Performance baselines for skill registry persistence operations:

• SkillModelConstruction.time_from_domain -- Domain-to-ORM mapping
• SkillModelReconstruction.time_to_domain -- ORM-to-domain reconstruction
• SkillRepositoryCRUD.time_create_skill -- Single skill insert + commit
• SkillRepositoryCRUD.time_get_skill -- Lookup by name
• SkillRepositoryCRUD.time_list_all -- List all skills
• SkillRepositoryCRUD.time_list_namespace -- List with namespace filter
• SkillRegistryListPerformance.time_list_100_skills -- List with 100 seeded skills
• SkillRegistryListPerformance.time_list_100_skills_filtered -- Filtered list with 100 skills

Running Persistence Tests

# Unit tests (Behave) -- runs all features including persistence
nox -s unit_tests

# Run only plan persistence scenarios
nox -s unit_tests -- features/plan_persistence.feature

# Run only action persistence scenarios
nox -s unit_tests -- features/action_persistence.feature

# Run only skill registry persistence scenarios
nox -s unit_tests -- features/skill_registry.feature

# Integration tests (Robot) -- runs all robot suites including persistence E2E
nox -s integration_tests

# Run only plan persistence E2E
python -m robot robot/plan_persistence_e2e.robot

# Run only persistence lifecycle E2E
python -m robot robot/persistence_lifecycle.robot

# Run only skill registry smoke tests
nox -s integration_tests -- robot/skill_registry.robot

# Run only persistence robot alignment (Behave)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/persistence_robot_alignment.feature

Subplan Model Test Suites

The subplan model (hierarchy, configuration, failure handling) has dedicated test suites at unit, integration, and benchmark levels.

Behave: Subplan Model (features/subplan_model.feature)

33 scenarios covering Plan hierarchy properties, SubplanConfig defaults, SubplanStatus tracking, SubplanFailureHandler decisions, and CLI dict rendering:

Area	Scenarios	Description
Root plan identity	2	is_root_plan, is_subplan, depth for root plans
Child plan identity	3	Parent reference, attempt counter, root propagation
Default values	4	Phase, state, automation level, subplan_config defaults
SubplanConfig storage	3	Sequential/parallel config, standalone defaults
Hierarchy helpers	3	has_subplans, depth for non-root plans
Lifecycle transitions	2	Child plans follow same phase transition rules
Dependency guardrails	5	FailureHandler stop/retry decisions, phase independence
CLI dict rendering	3	parent_plan_id, subplan_count in output
Validation guardrails	4	Invalid ULIDs, out-of-range config values

Step definitions: features/steps/subplan_model_steps.py

All step names are prefixed with subplan-test to avoid AmbiguousStep conflicts with existing plan_model_steps.py steps.

Robot: Subplan Model (robot/subplan_model.robot)

11 smoke tests exercising subplan model properties via Python helper scripts:

Test Case	Description
Root Plan Identity Flags	is_root_plan=True, is_subplan=False, depth=0
Child Plan Identity Flags	is_subplan=True, is_root_plan=False, depth=-1
Three Level Hierarchy Root Propagation	root_plan_id propagates through 3 levels
SubplanConfig Defaults	All default values are sensible
SubplanConfig Custom Settings	Parallel mode with custom retry settings
Failure Handler Stop Others On Fail Fast	should_stop_others with fail_fast=True
Failure Handler Retry Retriable Error	should_retry for TimeoutError
Failure Handler Skip Non Retriable Error	should_retry skips ConfigurationError
CLI Dict Renders Parent Plan Id For Child	parent_plan_id in child plan CLI dict
CLI Dict Renders Subplan Count	subplan_count in parent plan CLI dict
Plan With Subplan Config And Statuses	Full plan model with config + statuses

Helper script: robot/helper_subplan_model.py

ASV Benchmarks (benchmarks/subplan_model_validation_bench.py)

Performance baselines for subplan model operations:

• SubplanConfigValidationSuite -- time_default_config_creation, time_custom_config_creation, time_config_model_dump, time_config_model_dump_json
• SubplanStatusValidationSuite -- time_minimal_status_creation, time_full_status_creation, time_status_model_dump
• SubplanFailureHandlerSuite -- time_should_stop_others_fail_fast, time_should_stop_others_no_fail_fast, time_should_retry_retriable, time_should_retry_non_retriable
• SubplanHierarchySuite -- time_is_root_plan, time_is_subplan, time_depth_root, time_depth_child, time_has_subplans, time_cli_dict_with_subplans, time_child_plan_creation, time_plan_with_subplans_creation

Running Subplan Model Tests

# Behave only (subplan model feature)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/subplan_model.feature

# Robot only (subplan model suite)
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/subplan_model.robot

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

CI Pipeline

The Forgejo CI pipeline runs these jobs in order:

1. lint — nox -s lint (ruff check)
2. typecheck — nox -s typecheck (pyright)
3. security — nox -s security_scan (bandit + vulture)
4. quality — nox -s complexity (radon)
5. unit_tests — nox -s unit_tests (behave)
6. integration_tests — nox -s integration_tests (robot)
7. coverage — nox -s coverage_report (fail-under 97%)
8. build — nox -s build (wheel)

All jobs use Python 3.13 and route commands through nox. See docs/development/ci-cd.md for full CI/CD documentation.

Troubleshooting

Coverage report shows 0% or very low coverage

Ensure you're running in serial mode (not parallel). The coverage_report nox session handles this correctly. Do not run behave directly outside of coverage run.

Also ensure:

• parallel = false is set in [tool.coverage.run]
• COVERAGE_FILE and COVERAGE_RCFILE env vars are set correctly by the nox session

AmbiguousStep errors in Behave

Two step files define the same @given/@when/@then pattern. Behave loads all step files globally. Make step names unique or use more specific patterns.

Robot Resource file does not exist

Use Resource ${CURDIR}/filename.resource instead of bare Resource filename.resource. Robot resolves bare paths relative to CWD, not the test file directory.

Robot No module named cleveragents

Ensure Robot tests use ${PYTHON} (injected by nox from the venv) instead of bare python in Run Process calls.

In-memory SQLite tests lose data between repository calls

When writing Behave tests that use sqlite:///:memory: with a sessionmaker, do not create a new Session per repository call. SQLite in-memory databases use StaticPool (a single shared connection). If each repository method creates its own session, the abandoned sessions may be garbage-collected at unpredictable times, triggering a ROLLBACK that discards previously flushed data.

Fix: Create a single shared Session at scenario setup and pass a factory that always returns it:

real_factory = sessionmaker(bind=engine)
shared_session = real_factory()
repo = MyRepository(session_factory=lambda: shared_session)

This mirrors the production UnitOfWork pattern (ADR-019) where all repositories share one session within a transaction. See features/steps/skill_registry_steps.py for a working example.

Tests hang indefinitely

Add timeout parameters to Run Process calls in Robot tests:

${result}=    Run Process    ${PYTHON}    -m    cleveragents    ...    timeout=30s

Validation Edge Case Test Catalog

The validation edge case suites exercise boundary conditions, error paths, and conflict detection across the validation subsystem.

Shared Fixtures (features/fixtures/validation/)

Fixture File	Description
malformed_tool_output.json	Missing required fields, wrong types, extra nulls, non-object outputs
missing_resources.json	Dangling references, unresolvable paths, circular dependencies
validation_timeouts.json	Slow validators, zero/negative timeouts, partial results
invalid_schema_transforms.json	Transforms returning non-dict, missing type, null, circular refs
mixed_ordering.json	Required vs informational ordering, duplicate attachment IDs

Each fixture file is a JSON document with a "fixtures" array. Each entry has "name", "description", "input", and "expected_error" fields.

Behave Suite: features/validation_edge_cases.feature

25 scenarios covering:

Area	Scenarios	Description
Malformed tool output	6	Missing fields, wrong types, nulls, empty/string outputs
Missing resources	5	Dangling actions, unresolvable paths, missing actors, circular deps
Validation timeouts	4	Slow validators, zero timeout, negative timeout, partial results
Invalid schema transforms	3	Non-dict returns, missing type field, null schema
Mixed ordering	4	Required-before-informational, duplicate attachment IDs, unknown levels
Concurrent conflicts	1	Two validators on same resource detect conflict
Rollback on failure	2	Required failure triggers rollback of pending changes

Step definitions: features/steps/validation_edge_case_steps.py

All step names are prefixed with validation edge to avoid AmbiguousStep conflicts with existing steps.

Robot Suite: robot/validation_edge.robot

6 integration tests exercising the validation edge case helper:

Test Case	Description
Validation Edge Load All Fixtures	Loads all fixture files and verifies structure
Validation Edge Malformed Output Detection	Detects malformed tool output patterns
Validation Edge Missing Resource Error Paths	Validates missing resource reference detection
Validation Edge Timeout Simulation	Validates timeout simulation fixture data
Validation Edge Schema Validation Errors	Validates schema transform error detection
Validation Edge Unknown Command Returns Error	Verifies unknown command exits with code 1

Helper script: robot/helper_validation_edge.py

ASV Benchmarks: benchmarks/validation_edge_bench.py

Two benchmark suites:

• ValidationEdgeFixtureLoadSuite -- time_load_malformed_tool_output, time_load_missing_resources, time_load_validation_timeouts, time_load_invalid_schema_transforms, time_load_mixed_ordering, time_load_all_fixtures
• ValidationEdgeDetectionSuite -- time_malformed_output_detection, time_missing_resource_detection, time_validation_ordering, time_combined_edge_detection

Running the Validation Edge Case Suites

# Behave only (validation edge cases)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/validation_edge_cases.feature

# Robot only (validation edge suite)
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/validation_edge.robot

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

Scale Testing

Scale tests validate performance baselines for repository indexing and decomposition across different repository sizes (1K, 5K, and 10K files).

Fixtures

Scale test fixtures live in features/fixtures/scale/:

• scale_metadata.json — Scale profile definitions (file count, language mix, expected timings)
• baseline_thresholds.json — Performance threshold matrices (p50/p95/p99 per operation per file count)
• generator_instructions.md — Manual instructions for generating synthetic repos

Running Scale Tests

# Behave scale test scenarios
nox -s unit_tests -- features/scale_test.feature

# Robot scale test integration
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/scale_test.robot

# ASV scale fixture benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

Scale Test Suites

Suite	Framework	Scenarios	Description
features/scale_test.feature	Behave	20	Fixture loading, metadata validation, threshold checks, distribution simulation
robot/scale_test.robot	Robot	6	Integration-level fixture validation via helper script
benchmarks/scale_fixture_bench.py	ASV	6	Performance benchmarks for fixture processing

For full scale testing documentation, see docs/development/scale_testing.md.

CLI Extension Test Fixtures

The CLI extension tests cover automation profile, invariant, and actor override functionality added in #325. Deeper coverage added in #326 validates resolution logic, ordering semantics, error cases, and output format snapshots.

Test Fixture Patterns

The CLI extension test suites use a mocked lifecycle service pattern. The _get_lifecycle_service function in both plan.py and action.py is patched so that tests exercise real CLI argument parsing, validation, and output rendering without requiring a database or running server.

Common Fixtures

Fixture	Module	Description
_make_plan()	cli_extensions_steps.py	Creates a Plan instance with configurable automation profile, invariants, and actor overrides
_make_action()	cli_extensions_steps.py	Creates an Action with configurable optional fields (estimation_actor, invariant_actor, inputs_schema, automation_profile)
CliRunner	typer.testing	Invokes CLI commands in-process without subprocess overhead
MagicMock service	unittest.mock	Mocks PlanLifecycleService for plan/action operations

Automation Profile Resolution Fixtures

Tests validate that each builtin profile name (manual, review, supervised, cautious, trusted, auto) resolves correctly through the CLI and that invalid profile names are rejected with a helpful error listing available profiles. The service mock returns a Plan with an AutomationProfileRef to verify end-to-end profile assignment.

Invariant Ordering Fixtures

Tests pass multiple --invariant flags and verify the service receives them in exact insertion order. This tests the list-accumulation behaviour of Typer's repeated option handling.

Actor Override Error Fixtures

Tests exercise the validate_namespaced_actor regex (^[a-z][a-z0-9-]*/[a-z][a-z0-9._-]*$) with various invalid inputs:

• Empty string
• Missing slash (no-slash)
• Uppercase characters (UPPER/case)
• Leading slash (/leading-slash)
• Trailing slash (trail/ing/)
• Double slashes (open//ai)
• Special characters (open@ai/gpt-4)
• Numeric-leading namespace (123/model)
• Whitespace (open ai/gpt)

Output Snapshot Assertions

Tests render plan status, lifecycle-list, and action show output in JSON, YAML, and table formats, then assert that:

• JSON output is valid (parses without error)
• Required keys are present (namespaced_name, phase, automation_profile, etc.)
• Invariant text values survive serialization round-trips
• YAML output contains expected field names
• Table output contains human-readable field values

Behave Suite: features/cli_extensions.feature

Covers scenarios across these areas:

Area	Scenarios	Description
Automation profile flags	2	Valid and invalid profile names
Profile resolution (deep)	9	All builtin profiles + error cases with special chars, spaces, empty
Invariant flags	2	Single and dual invariant flags
Invariant ordering (deep)	2	Three and five invariant insertion-order preservation
Actor overrides (valid)	4	Strategy, execution, estimation, invariant actors
Actor overrides (invalid)	4	Malformed namespace/name formats
Actor error cases (deep)	11	Empty, double-slash, special chars, numeric-leading, whitespace
Plan status display	4	Table, JSON, single plan with invariants/profile
Plan lifecycle-list	2	Table and JSON with invariant count
Action show	8	Optional actors, invariants, inputs_schema, automation profile
Combined flags	1	Profile + invariant together
validate_namespaced_actor	2	Unit-level accept/reject assertions
Output snapshots (deep)	9	JSON/YAML/table format validation for plan and action

Step definitions: features/steps/cli_extensions_steps.py

Robot Suite: robot/cli_extensions.robot

Integration tests exercising CLI extensions through Python helper scripts:

Test Case	Description
Plan Use With Invariants	Verifies --invariant flags pass through correctly
Plan Use With Automation Profile	Verifies --automation-profile works
Plan Use Actor Validation Valid	Valid namespaced actor format accepted
Plan Use Actor Validation Invalid	Invalid actor format rejected
Plan Use Combined Profile And Invariants	Both profile and invariants together
Action Show With Optional Actors And Invariants	action show renders estimation_actor, invariant_actor, invariants, inputs_schema
Action Show JSON With Optional Fields	JSON output includes all optional fields
Invariant Ordering Preserved	Multiple invariant flags preserve insertion order
Profile Resolution All Builtins	All builtin profile names resolve correctly

Helper script: robot/helper_cli_extensions.py

ASV Benchmarks

Two benchmark files cover CLI extension performance:

benchmarks/cli_extensions_bench.py (original):

• PlanUseWithProfileSuite — plan use with automation profile
• PlanUseWithInvariantsSuite — plan use with invariant flags
• PlanUseActorValidationSuite — plan use with actor overrides
• PlanStatusWithExtendedFieldsSuite — status/lifecycle-list rendering
• ActionShowExtendedSuite — action show in rich and JSON formats

benchmarks/cli_extension_tests_bench.py (extended #326):

• ProfileResolutionSuite — resolve all builtin profiles, single profile, invalid profile
• InvariantOrderingSuite — three and five invariant flag parsing
• ActorValidationErrorSuite — valid/invalid actor regex, CLI rejection
• OutputFormatRenderingSuite — JSON/YAML/table rendering for action show and plan status

Running CLI Extension Tests

# Behave only (CLI extensions feature)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/cli_extensions.feature

# Robot only (CLI extensions suite)
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/cli_extensions.robot

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

M2 Actor + Tool Source Smoke Suite

The M2 smoke suite validates the foundation for the Actor Graphs + Tool Sources epic (#356). It covers actor YAML loading, skill registry, tool lifecycle, and MCP stub tool discovery.

Fixtures

M2 fixtures live in features/fixtures/m2/:

Fixture File	Description
m2_hierarchical_actor.yaml	Graph-type actor with planner → executor → reviewer nodes
m2_skill_pack.yaml	Skill pack with tool references and an inline tool

MCP Stub Server

The MCP stub server (features/mocks/mcp_stub_server.py) simulates MCP tool discovery and invocation in-process without requiring the real MCP adapter (#159). It exposes three deterministic tools: mcp/search, mcp/fetch, and mcp/transform.

Usage in tests:

from features.mocks.mcp_stub_server import McpStubServer

server = McpStubServer()
server.start()
tools = server.discover()       # Returns 3 stub tools
result = server.invoke("mcp/search", {"query": "hello"})
server.stop()

Test Suites

Suite	Framework	Scenarios	Description
features/m2_actor_tool_smoke.feature	Behave	10	Actor loading, skill registry, tool lifecycle, MCP stub
robot/m2_actor_tool_smoke.robot	Robot	6	CLI-level smoke for actor/skill/tool/MCP operations
benchmarks/m2_actor_tool_smoke_bench.py	ASV	12	Baseline runtime for actor, skill, tool, and MCP operations

Running the M2 Smoke Suite

# Behave only (M2 feature)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/m2_actor_tool_smoke.feature

# Robot only (M2 suite)
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/m2_actor_tool_smoke.robot

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

What Is NOT Tested (deferred to dependent issues)

• Real MCP adapter integration (#159, assigned to Aditya)
• Agent skills loader (#160, assigned to Aditya)
• Hierarchical actor compiler (#158, assigned to Jeff)

The MCP stub server provides a test seam that can be replaced with the real adapter once #159 lands.

M1 Source-Code Plan Lifecycle Smoke Tests

The M1 source-code smoke suites verify the minimal end-to-end source-code workflow: a git repo fixture, a git-checkout resource config, and a minimal action YAML with strategy/execution actors. Helper steps create temp projects, link resources, and capture plan IDs for subsequent CLI verification.

Fixtures (features/fixtures/m1/)

Fixture File	Description
git_repo.json	Minimal git repo definitions with file listings and branch info
git_checkout_resource.json	Git-checkout resource configs with path and branch properties
action_sourcecode.yaml	Minimal action YAML with strategy/execution actors and arguments

Behave Suite: features/m1_sourcecode_smoke.feature

16 scenarios covering:

Area	Scenarios	Description
Fixture loading	3	Load and validate git repo, checkout resource, action YAML
Action create	1	Create action from YAML config via CLI
Project/resource	2	Create temp project, link resource
Plan use	3	Use action to create plan, with project and args
Plan execute	1	Execute transitions to execute phase
Plan diff	1	Show changeset via diff
Plan apply	1	Apply transitions to terminal state
Negative cases	3	Unknown action, wrong phase, invalid actor

Step definitions: features/steps/m1_sourcecode_smoke_steps.py

All step names are prefixed with m1 smoke to avoid AmbiguousStep conflicts with existing steps.

Robot Suite: robot/m1_sourcecode_smoke.robot

8 integration tests exercising the M1 lifecycle through CLI:

Test Case	Description
M1 Action Create From Config	Creates action from fixture YAML
M1 Plan Use Creates Strategize Plan	Uses action to create plan
M1 Plan Use With Project Link	Plan use with project argument
M1 Plan Execute Transitions Phase	Execute phase transition
M1 Plan Diff Shows Changeset	Diff command for changeset
M1 Plan Apply Reaches Terminal	Apply to terminal state
M1 Full Lifecycle Action To Apply	End-to-end flow
M1 Plan Use With Plain Format	--format plain for stable assertions

Helper script: robot/helper_m1_sourcecode_smoke.py

ASV Benchmarks: benchmarks/m1_sourcecode_smoke_bench.py

Six benchmark suites measuring M1 CLI overhead:

• M1ActionCreateSuite -- time_action_create_from_yaml
• M1PlanUseSuite -- time_plan_use_minimal, time_plan_use_with_project, time_plan_use_with_args, time_plan_use_plain_format
• M1PlanExecuteSuite -- time_plan_execute
• M1PlanApplySuite -- time_plan_lifecycle_apply
• M1FixtureLoadSuite -- time_load_git_repo_fixture, time_load_git_checkout_fixture

Running the M1 Source-Code Smoke Suites

# Behave only (M1 smoke feature)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/m1_sourcecode_smoke.feature

# Robot only (M1 smoke suite)
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/m1_sourcecode_smoke.robot

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

M1 Smoke Run Instructions

To perform a quick M1 source-code smoke run:

1. Run the Behave feature:

   nox -s unit_tests -- features/m1_sourcecode_smoke.feature
   

2. Run the Robot suite:

   nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/m1_sourcecode_smoke.robot
   

3. Run benchmarks:

   nox -s benchmark
   

Failure Triage Tips

• AmbiguousStep errors: All M1 smoke steps are prefixed with m1 smoke. If ambiguous, check that no other step file defines a conflicting pattern.
• Fixture file not found: Verify features/fixtures/m1/ contains all three fixture files (git_repo.json, git_checkout_resource.json, action_sourcecode.yaml).
• Robot FAIL sentinel: Each Robot helper subcommand prints a detailed FAIL: line with exit code and output when something goes wrong. Check the Robot log for these messages.
• InvalidPhaseTransitionError: Verify the plan is in the correct phase before attempting a transition. The M1 smoke tests mock phase state carefully.
• Coverage drops: The M1 smoke tests cover fixture loading, CLI argument parsing, and mock service integration. If coverage drops, look at build/htmlcov/index.html for uncovered lines in plan/action CLI commands.

M3 Decision Tree, Validation Gating, and Invariant Enforcement Smoke Tests

Overview

The M3 smoke suite validates the decision tree, correction workflow, validation gating (add / attach / detach), and invariant constraint (add / list / remove) subsystems via CLI integration tests.

Issue: #179

Files

File	Purpose
features/m3_decision_validation_smoke.feature	Behave BDD scenarios (25 scenarios)
features/steps/m3_decision_validation_smoke_steps.py	Step implementations
features/fixtures/m3/decision_tree_outputs.json	Decision tree fixture data
features/fixtures/m3/validation_attachments.json	Validation attachment fixture data
features/fixtures/m3/invariant_configs.json	Invariant config fixture data
robot/m3_decision_validation_smoke.robot	Robot Framework integration tests (8 cases)
robot/helper_m3_decision_validation_smoke.py	Robot helper with 8 subcommands
benchmarks/m3_smoke_bench.py	ASV benchmark suites (5 classes)

Scenario Categories

1. Decision tree fixture loading -- Loads JSON fixtures and verifies decision tree structure, invariant nodes, and correction metadata.
2. Validation fixture loading -- Verifies validation attachment data including required and informational modes.
3. Invariant fixture loading -- Verifies invariant config data including merge set precedence.
4. Invariant CLI -- Tests agents invariant add, list, and remove commands with global and project scopes.
5. Validation CLI -- Tests agents validation add, attach, and detach commands.
6. Plan correct CLI -- Tests agents plan correct with --dry-run, --mode revert, and --mode append.
7. Negative cases -- Empty guidance, invalid correction mode.

Mock Strategy

• Invariant CLI patches cleveragents.cli.commands.invariant._get_service
• Validation CLI patches cleveragents.cli.commands.validation._get_tool_registry_service
• Plan CLI patches cleveragents.cli.commands.plan._get_lifecycle_service
• Correction patches CorrectionService constructor at module level

Failure Triage Tips

• AmbiguousStep errors: All M3 smoke steps are prefixed with m3 smoke. If ambiguous, check that no other step file defines a conflicting pattern.
• Fixture file not found: Verify features/fixtures/m3/ contains all three JSON fixture files.
• Robot FAIL sentinel: Each Robot helper subcommand prints a detailed FAIL: line with exit code and output. Check the Robot log.
• Coverage drops: The M3 smoke tests cover invariant/validation CLI commands, plan correct workflow, and fixture loading. Check build/htmlcov/index.html for uncovered lines.

M4 Correction + Subplan Smoke Suite

The M4 smoke suite validates correction flows, subplan execution, and conflict simulation for the M4 milestone. It covers decision tree corrections (revert and append modes, dry-run impact analysis), subplan lifecycle (sequential, parallel, dependency-ordered execution), failure handling (stop-others, retry logic), and merge conflict simulation (git-three-way, fail-on-conflict, last-wins, sequential-apply strategies).

Fixtures (features/fixtures/m4/)

Fixture File	Description
correction_flows.json	Revert, append, dry-run, and high-risk correction scenarios
subplan_execution.json	Sequential, parallel, dependency-ordered, and retry subplan configs
conflict_simulations.json	Merge conflict scenarios for all SubplanMergeStrategy variants

Behave Suite: features/m4_correction_subplan_smoke.feature

20 scenarios covering:

Area	Scenarios	Description
Fixture loading	3	Load and validate correction, subplan, and conflict fixtures
Correction flows	4	Revert, append, dry-run, and invalid mode via CLI
Subplan execution	2	Sequential and parallel subplan status rendering
Failure handling	3	Stop-others, retry retriable, skip non-retriable
Conflict simulation	3	No-conflict, fail-on-conflict, last-wins merge strategies
Negative cases	2	Non-existent plan, empty decision ID

Step definitions: features/steps/m4_correction_subplan_smoke_steps.py

All step names are prefixed with m4 smoke to avoid AmbiguousStep conflicts with existing steps.

Robot Suite: robot/m4_correction_subplan_smoke.robot

8 integration tests exercising M4 correction and subplan flows through CLI:

Test Case	Description
M4 Correction Revert Via CLI	Invoke plan correct --mode revert
M4 Correction Append Via CLI	Invoke plan correct --mode append
M4 Correction Dry Run Via CLI	Invoke plan correct --dry-run
M4 Subplan Status Sequential	Plan status with sequential subplan config
M4 Subplan Status Parallel	Plan status with parallel subplan config
M4 Failure Handler Evaluation	SubplanFailureHandler decision logic
M4 Fixture Loading	Load all M4 fixture files
M4 Full Correction And Subplan Flow	End-to-end correction + subplan + failure handler

Helper script: robot/helper_m4_correction_subplan_smoke.py

ASV Benchmarks: benchmarks/m4_smoke_bench.py

Four benchmark suites measuring M4 suite runtime:

• M4CorrectionCLISuite -- time_correction_revert, time_correction_append, time_correction_dry_run
• M4SubplanStatusSuite -- time_status_with_subplans_json, time_status_with_subplans_rich
• M4FailureHandlerSuite -- time_should_stop_others_fail_fast, time_should_retry_retriable, time_should_retry_non_retriable
• M4FixtureLoadSuite -- time_load_correction_flows, time_load_subplan_execution, time_load_conflict_simulations, time_load_all_fixtures

Running the M4 Correction + Subplan Smoke Suites

# Behave only (M4 smoke feature)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/m4_correction_subplan_smoke.feature

# Robot only (M4 smoke suite)
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/m4_correction_subplan_smoke.robot

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

Failure Triage Tips

• AmbiguousStep errors: All M4 smoke steps are prefixed with m4 smoke. If ambiguous, check that no other step file defines a conflicting pattern.
• Fixture file not found: Verify features/fixtures/m4/ contains all three fixture files (correction_flows.json, subplan_execution.json, conflict_simulations.json).
• Robot FAIL sentinel: Each Robot helper subcommand prints a detailed FAIL: line with exit code and output when something goes wrong.
• Correction service mock: The M4 steps patch CorrectionService directly in the plan CLI module. If the import path changes, update the patch target.
• Coverage drops: The M4 smoke tests cover correction CLI commands, SubplanFailureHandler logic, and fixture loading. Check build/htmlcov/index.html for uncovered lines in correction/plan CLI code.

---

M5 ACMS Pipeline + Large-Project Context Smoke Tests

The M5 smoke suites verify the ACMS context pipeline foundation: context assembly, budget enforcement, multi-project context, context analysis, and project context policy resolution.

Behave: features/m5_acms_smoke.feature

27 scenarios covering:

Area	Scenarios
Fixture loading	Load ACMS context policy, large project context, analysis results
Context policy resolution	Default view, inheritance chain, strategize/execute/apply overrides
Budget enforcement	max_file_size, max_total_size, zero/negative validation, unlimited
Context assembly (CLI)	list, add, show, clear via mocked ContextService
Project context policy CLI	show policy, inspect/simulate stubs (NotImplementedError)
Context analysis agent	Summary, dependencies, relevance scores (mocked)
Multi-project context	Independent context per project
Exclusion patterns	Glob-based path filtering

Step definitions: features/steps/m5_acms_smoke_steps.py Fixtures: features/fixtures/m5/

• acms_context_policy.json -- Phase-specific context policy with size limits
• large_project_context.json -- Simulated 500-file project with tier metadata
• context_analysis_results.json -- Pre-computed analysis with dependencies and relevance scores

Robot: robot/m5_acms_smoke.robot

Test Case	Description
Load ACMS Context Policy Fixture	Validates fixture structure
Load Large Project Context Fixture	Validates file count and entries
Resolve Default View From Empty Policy	Empty policy includes all paths
Resolve Strategize Inherits From Default	Phase inheritance works
Resolve Strategize With Override	Override takes precedence
Budget Max File Size Enforcement	File-level budget check
Budget Max Total Size Enforcement	Aggregate budget check
Invalid Phase Raises Error	Error handling for invalid phases
Context Analysis Fixture Has Required Fields	Analysis result structure
Multi Project Independent Context	Independent context per project

Helper script: robot/helper_m5_acms_smoke.py

ASV Benchmarks: benchmarks/m5_smoke_bench.py

Four benchmark suites measuring M5 suite runtime:

• PolicyResolutionSuite -- time_resolve_view across all 4 phases
• BudgetEnforcementSuite -- time_check_file_budget, time_check_total_budget with 100/1000/10000 files
• FixtureLoadSuite -- time_load_policy_fixture, time_load_large_project_fixture, time_load_analysis_fixture, time_load_all_fixtures
• ContextViewConstructionSuite -- time_construct_view, time_construct_full_policy with 1/10/50 path patterns

Running the M5 ACMS Smoke Suites

# Behave only (M5 smoke feature)
nox -s unit_tests -- features/m5_acms_smoke.feature

# Robot only (M5 smoke suite)
nox -s integration_tests -- --suite robot/m5_acms_smoke.robot

# Benchmarks
nox -s benchmark

Failure Triage Tips

• AmbiguousStep errors: All M5 smoke steps are prefixed with m5 smoke. If ambiguous, check that no other step file defines a conflicting pattern.
• Fixture file not found: Verify features/fixtures/m5/ contains all three fixture files (acms_context_policy.json, large_project_context.json, context_analysis_results.json).
• context_inspect/context_simulate stubs: These commands raise NotImplementedError by design until ACMS wiring is complete.
• Coverage drops: The M5 smoke tests cover context policy resolution, budget enforcement, and CLI context commands. Check build/htmlcov/index.html for uncovered lines in context-related modules.