test: consolidate running tools test to a tdt

[omarluq]

No description provided.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 398bd827-0f69-4f8b-bcd5-511726ef9c6e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 69da64e and ac4aa16.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• internal/terminal/running_tools_internal_test.go

---

📝 Walkthrough

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Refactored test suite to use table-driven approach for improved maintainability and parallel test execution.

Walkthrough

Refactors internal/terminal/running_tools_internal_test.go by replacing five standalone exported test functions with a single table-driven TestRunningToolBlocks suite. Adds a runningToolBlockTestCase struct, per-scenario case constructors, a shared runRunningToolBlockCase execution helper, and a runningToolBlockNames utility for assertions.

Changes

Running Tool Blocks Test Refactor

Layer / File(s)

Summary

Table-driven test harness and name helper internal/terminal/running_tools_internal_test.go

Removes TestRunningToolBlocksAppendRenderAndRemove, TestApplyStreamedToolStartUsesFallbackForBlankName, TestRemoveRunningToolBlockMatchesNameAndArguments, TestRemoveRunningToolBlockFallsBackToName, and TestResetStreamingBlocksClearsRunningTools. Adds runningToolBlockTestCase struct, TestRunningToolBlocks with parallel subtests over five scenario constructors, runRunningToolBlockCase for shared execution/assertion, and runningToolBlockNames helper returning []string of Call.Name values.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

Poem

🐇 Five tests hopped around, each going alone,
Now they sit at one table, a family grown.
A struct holds their names, their runs, and their want,
Parallel subtests dance — no more duplicate jaunt!
The rabbit refactors, keeps coverage tight,
Table-driven tests fill the warren with light. ✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	❓ Inconclusive	No pull request description was provided by the author, making it impossible to evaluate whether the description relates to the changeset.	Add a pull request description explaining the purpose and benefits of consolidating the tests into a table-driven test format.

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly identifies the main change: consolidating running tools tests into a table-driven test (TDT), which matches the refactoring described in the changeset.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate docstrings

• Create stacked PR
• Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch omarluq/consolidate-some-tests

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 80.39%. Comparing base (69da64e) to head (ac4aa16).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #137   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   80.38%   80.39%           
=======================================
  Files         278      278           
  Lines       21911    21911           
=======================================
+ Hits        17614    17616    +2     
+ Misses       3083     3082    -1     
+ Partials     1214     1213    -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	80.39% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.