test: improve develop branch test coverage#54
Merged
Conversation
Rust (clawpal-core): 145 → 195 unit tests (+50) - ssh/config: 1→15 tests (multi-host, wildcards, quotes, comments, equals separator, dedup, case-insensitive keys, first-value-wins) - ssh/mod: 4→18 tests (legacy args, destination, port, identity file, resolve_target, shell_escape, error display, candidate_key_paths) - connect: 2→10 tests (slug_from_home, missing home errors, explicit instance ids, error display) - sessions: 4→14 tests (array content preview, multiple agents, empty input, sort order, filter edge cases) - cron: 2→10 tests (plain array, object map, empty/invalid input, ordering, preserves existing jobId) - watchdog: 1→8 tests (dead state, deployed flag, invalid json, empty/whitespace ps output) - openclaw: 4→10 tests (array extraction, nonzero exit, no json, nested json, error display) - backup: 3→9 tests (empty input, trailing slash, malformed lines, dedup versions) TypeScript (Bun): 10 → 58 tests (+48) - guidance.ts: 30 new tests (cooldown/transient/explained/registry/container error classifiers, throttle logic) - model-value.ts: 8 new tests (provider+model combining, prefix dedup, whitespace, edge cases) - utils.ts: 12 new tests (formatTime dash/ISO/RFC3339/invalid, formatBytes all units)
Contributor
📊 Test Coverage Report
Coverage measured by |
bun:test in 1.3.x does not export beforeEach; it was imported but never used, causing typecheck to fail.
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: c4f9079a40
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| // Should produce a valid date-time string | ||
| expect(result).toMatch(/^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2} \d{2}:\d{2}:\d{2}$/); | ||
| expect(result).toContain("2026"); | ||
| expect(result).toContain("14:30:00"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This check hard-codes 14:30:00, but formatTime converts the dash form through a UTC date (...Z) and then formats in the runner's local timezone, so non-UTC environments produce different clock times (for example, UTC+8 yields 22:30:00). That makes the test fail or become environment-dependent even when the implementation is correct; assert a timezone-agnostic property or derive the expected local time from the current TZ instead of pinning a fixed HH:MM:SS.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
Rust (clawpal-core): 195 → 283 unit tests (+88) - config: 17→57 (+40) — all template patches, read_model_value, collect_change_paths, channel nodes, resolve_channel_mode/allowlist - discovery: 3→19 (+16) — accounts path, slug/name fallback, wildcards, dedup, bindings, numeric IDs, edge cases - health: 4→15 (+11) — count_agents, parse_active_agents, shell_escape, error display, missing SSH config - install/docker: 5→12 (+7) — needs_local_image_fallback variants, compose_env, openclaw_state_dir, tilde expansion - instance: 8→20 (+12) — sanitize_instance_id_segment, endpoint_key, canonical_remote_instance_id, normalize, ids, error display - precheck: 7→12 (+5) — empty profiles, valid registry, existing home, multiple profile check TypeScript (Bun): 58 → 69 tests (+11) - prompt-templates: 11 new (renderPromptTemplate + extractPromptBlock pure logic) Rust line coverage: 67.14% → ~73% (estimated from local llvm-cov)
Keith-CY
approved these changes
Mar 3, 2026
Collaborator
Keith-CY
left a comment
Keith-CY
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review summary
Approved.
Scope checked
- All changes are test-only ( additions) across Rust and Bun test files.
- No production logic paths were modified in this PR.
Notes
- The new test cases materially expand coverage for parsing and config/instance/error helpers.
- I did not identify correctness, security, or reliability regressions in the added tests.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Two rounds of test coverage improvement for the
developbranch.Round 1: Rust 145→195 (+50) · TS 10→58 (+48)
Round 2: Rust 195→283 (+88) · TS 58→69 (+11)
Coverage delta (local llvm-cov)
No production code changes
All changes are test-only (
#[cfg(test)]blocks +__tests__/files).