test(viewer): session-ledger OKF export adapter proptest surface (WBS-6.2 #461) - #477
test(viewer): session-ledger OKF export adapter proptest surface (WBS-6.2 #461)#477KooshaPari wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
) Adds crates/sl-viewer/tests/properties_viewer_async_states.rs with 7 proptest properties pinning the async_states SSOT: * SkeletonLayout::default() is Bundles. * SkeletonLayout exposes exactly three variants (Bundles, ListDetail, StreamFeed). * Every variant's Debug label is non-empty, single-line, and matches one of the documented names. * SkeletonLayout::default() matches the first arm in the match block in ContentSkeleton. * list_rows.clamp(3, 6) lands in [3, 6] for every input. * The clamp is monotonic non-decreasing. * The clamp has the documented fixed points (0/2 -> 3, 6/MAX -> 6). Updates WBS-6.2 evidence list, TRACEABILITY.json, and CHANGELOG.
…(WBS-6.2 #459) Adds crates/sl-viewer/tests/properties_session_ledger_okf.rs with 12 proptest properties pinning the session-ledger OKF SSOT: * OkfDocument::new(b, c) always produces okf = "1.0". * OkfDocument::new(b, c) propagates bundle.source_id into source_id and provenance.source_id. * OkfDocument::new(b, c) propagates c into provenance.corpus. * OkfDocument::new(b, c) starts with empty entities, relations, tags. * validate_okf_document reports exactly one unsupported_version error per non-"1.0" okf (with offending version in message). * validate_okf_document reports exactly one source_id_mismatch error per provenance/source mismatch. * Duplicate entity ids each surface a duplicate_entity_id error. * Dangling relation source / target surface their respective errors. * Every OkfValidationError carries non-empty field / code / message. First property test to exercise session_ledger (the core domain crate) from sl-viewer's test harness, pivoting the bounded lane beyond the viewer-only surface. Updates WBS-6.2 evidence list, TRACEABILITY.json, and CHANGELOG.
…6.2 #460) Adds crates/sl-viewer/tests/properties_session_ledger_worklog.rs with 11 proptest properties pinning the session-ledger worklog projector (crash-recovery / lost-work pipeline): * Empty sessions project None. * Final Role::User turn -> AwaitingAssistantResponse. * Final Role::Tool / Role::Subagent -> InterruptedExecution. * Final assistant turn with one of the 9 documented completion markers (complete / completed / done / [completed] / <completed> / status: complete / status: completed / task complete / task completed) projects None. * Final assistant turn without any marker projects as MissingCompletionMarker. * UnfinishedWorkItem carries the originating session id, corpus, and message_count. * summary never exceeds 241 chars and is single-line. * project_unfinished_work returns one item per unfinished session in input order and is deterministic. * WorklogProjection::from_session carries message_count and matches detect_unfinished exactly. Updates WBS-6.2 evidence list, TRACEABILITY.json, and CHANGELOG.
…-6.2 #461) Adds crates/sl-viewer/tests/properties_session_ledger_export.rs with 8 proptest properties pinning session_ledger::export_to_okf (the OKF v1 export pipeline entry point): * export_to_okf always produces okf = "1.0" and propagates bundle.source_id into source_id + provenance.source_id. * export_to_okf propagates the corpus arg into provenance.corpus. * Empty bundles yield zero entities / relations / tags. * Every exported document passes validate_okf_document. * export_to_okf is deterministic across calls. * Intent bundles emit exactly one goal entity (label = goal), one acceptance entity per acceptance signal, one constraint entity per constraint. * Context bundles emit exactly one resource entity when cwd is present. * Acceptance bundles emit exactly one gate entity with label = "resume-gate" and properties.ready = true / scope_sized = true. * The exporter never produces duplicate entity ids across mixed intent / context / acceptance / contract bundles. Updates WBS-6.2 evidence list, TRACEABILITY.json, and CHANGELOG.
🤖 CodeAnt AI — Review Status
|
Thanks for using CodeAnt! 🎉We're free for open-source projects. if you're enjoying it, help us grow by sharing. Share on X · |
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 27 minutes You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (7)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
codeant-ai
Bot
added
the
size:XL
![codeant-ai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/646884?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| prop_assert!(matching[0].message.contains(&bad_version)); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// `provenance.source_id != source_id` produces exactly one |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: The comment claims this fixture forces every validation error class, but the document contains no relations and therefore cannot exercise either dangling-relation diagnostic. A regression producing empty fields, codes, or messages for relation errors would pass this property. Add dangling source and target relations to the fixture or correct the claim. [comment mismatch]
Severity Level: Minor 🧹
- ⚠️ Relation diagnostic message regressions remain untested.
- ⚠️ Downstream OKF error rendering may lose actionable text.
Prompt for AI Agent 🤖
This is a comment left during a code review.
**Path:** crates/sl-viewer/tests/properties_session_ledger_okf.rs
**Line:** 140:143
**Comment:**
*Comment Mismatch: The comment claims this fixture forces every validation error class, but the document contains no relations and therefore cannot exercise either dangling-relation diagnostic. A regression producing empty fields, codes, or messages for relation errors would pass this property. Add dangling source and target relations to the fixture or correct the claim.
Validate the correctness of the flagged issue. If correct, How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, implement it and please make it concise.
Once fix is implemented, also check other comments on the same PR, and ask user if the user wants to fix the rest of the comments as well. if said yes, then fetch all the comments validate the correctness and implement a minimal fix| fn assistant_without_completion_marker_is_unfinished( | ||
| body in "[a-zA-Z0-9 .,!?]{1,40}", | ||
| ) { | ||
| let mut session = Session::new("a", Corpus::Forge); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: The generated body is documented as lacking a completion marker, but the strategy also accepts marker-only values such as complete, completed, or done. When Proptest generates one of those values, detect_unfinished correctly returns None and this assertion panics. Exclude completion-marker strings from the strategy or use an assumption before asserting unfinished work. [logic error]
Severity Level: Major ⚠️
- ❌ Worklog property tests can fail for valid completion messages.
- ⚠️ CI validation becomes dependent on generated input selection.
Prompt for AI Agent 🤖
This is a comment left during a code review.
**Path:** crates/sl-viewer/tests/properties_session_ledger_worklog.rs
**Line:** 102:102
**Comment:**
*Logic Error: The generated body is documented as lacking a completion marker, but the strategy also accepts marker-only values such as `complete`, `completed`, or `done`. When Proptest generates one of those values, `detect_unfinished` correctly returns `None` and this assertion panics. Exclude completion-marker strings from the strategy or use an assumption before asserting unfinished work.
Validate the correctness of the flagged issue. If correct, How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, implement it and please make it concise.
Once fix is implemented, also check other comments on the same PR, and ask user if the user wants to fix the rest of the comments as well. if said yes, then fetch all the comments validate the correctness and implement a minimal fix
User description
Summary
Adds
crates/sl-viewer/tests/properties_session_ledger_export.rswith 8 proptest properties pinningsession_ledger::export_to_okf(WBS-6.2 #461) — the OKF v1 export pipeline entry point (CLI--okf, wiki writer, search index publisher).export_to_okf(8 properties)okf = "1.0"and propagatesbundle.source_idintosource_id+provenance.source_id.provenance.corpus.validate_okf_document.cwdis present.label = "resume-gate"andproperties.ready = true/scope_sized = true.Validation
cargo test -p sl-viewer --test properties_session_ledger_export --features "desktop parquet" --locked— 8 passedcargo fmt --all --check— cleanWBS / TRACEABILITY
WBS-6.2 evidence list and
TRACEABILITY.jsongaincrates/sl-viewer/tests/properties_session_ledger_export.rs. CHANGELOG Unreleased documents the new surface.CodeAnt-AI Description
Expand property-test coverage for viewer layouts, session recovery, and OKF exports
What Changed
Impact
✅ Fewer regressions in unfinished-work recovery✅ More reliable OKF exports for downstream consumers✅ Clearer OKF validation errors💡 Usage Guide
Checking Your Pull Request
Every time you make a pull request, our system automatically looks through it. We check for security issues, mistakes in how you're setting up your infrastructure, and common code problems. We do this to make sure your changes are solid and won't cause any trouble later.
Talking to CodeAnt AI
Got a question or need a hand with something in your pull request? You can easily get in touch with CodeAnt AI right here. Just type the following in a comment on your pull request, and replace "Your question here" with whatever you want to ask:
This lets you have a chat with CodeAnt AI about your pull request, making it easier to understand and improve your code.
Example
Preserve Org Learnings with CodeAnt
You can record team preferences so CodeAnt AI applies them in future reviews. Reply directly to the specific CodeAnt AI suggestion (in the same thread) and replace "Your feedback here" with your input:
This helps CodeAnt AI learn and adapt to your team's coding style and standards.
Example
Retrigger review
Ask CodeAnt AI to review the PR again, by typing:
Check Your Repository Health
To analyze the health of your code repository, visit our dashboard at https://app.codeant.ai. This tool helps you identify potential issues and areas for improvement in your codebase, ensuring your repository maintains high standards of code health.