test: add unit tests for apptesting tools and fix lint errors

[joehan]

Description

Working on a new AI workflow for generating tests to improve out coverage. This one actually seems pretty decent, and the agent actually caught and fixed a subtle issue with the response when there are undefined fields.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @joehan, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request significantly enhances the reliability of the apptesting tools by introducing a comprehensive suite of unit tests for both the run_tests and check_status functionalities. Additionally, it addresses a subtle bug in the check_status tool, ensuring that its output is clean and only contains relevant, defined data. This effort is part of an initiative to improve code coverage, partially driven by an AI-powered test generation workflow.

Highlights

• New Unit Tests: Added comprehensive unit tests for the run_tests and check_status functions within the apptesting tools, covering various scenarios including release upload, test creation, default device handling, and status checks.
• Bug Fix in check_status: Implemented a fix in the check_status function to ensure that only defined fields (devices and releaseTest) are included in the tool's response, preventing issues with undefined values.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request adds unit tests for the app testing tools, which is a great step towards improving coverage and reliability. The tests cover the main functionalities of run_tests and check_status. The fix in check_status to conditionally build the response object is a good improvement for robustness. I've found one area in the new tests that could be strengthened to provide more thorough validation.

[gemini-code-assist]

This test currently verifies that the underlying functions are called when both release_test_name and getAvailableDevices are provided. To make it more robust, it should also assert that the final result object is correctly assembled with both releaseTest and devices keys, confirming the integration of the two data sources.

      const result = await check_status.fn(input, mockContext);

      expect(clientStub.getReleaseTest.called).to.be.true;
      expect(testEnvironmentCatalogStub.called).to.be.true;

      const resultText = (result.content[0] as any).text;
      const resultObj = safeLoad(resultText);
      expect(resultObj).to.deep.equal({
        releaseTest: { name: "test" },
        devices: [],
      });