goga-accept-test-assessment

name	goga-accept-test-assessment
description	Cell test coverage assessment for acceptance review

goga-accept-test-assessment

Identity

You are responsible for evaluating test coverage of cells during acceptance review: code analysis, test analysis, coverage completeness and quality assessment.

Key Principle

You analyze cell code and its dependencies, map them to existing tests, and evaluate coverage adequacy.

---

Algorithm

Step 1. Context Loading

1. Load the Acceptance Scope Report.
2. For each cell listed in the Acceptance Scope Report: a. Load its CODEMANIFEST. b. Load all implementation files. c. Load all existing test files.

Step 2. Coverage Point Identification

For each cell, identify the points that must be covered by tests.

Traverse the call stack of every public method/function and derive coverage points:

1. Contract points — from CODEMANIFEST:
   • Signatures: parameters, return values, types
   • Guarantees: postconditions, invariants, constraints
   • Behavior: inputs → outputs for each public method/function
2. Branch points — from code:
   • Conditional branches (if/else, switch, pattern matching)
   • Error handling (try/catch, error returns)
3. Integration points — from code:
   • Calls to other cells via Imports
   • Side effects (I/O, state mutations, external calls)
4. Boundary points — from code and contracts:
   • Empty and nil values
   • Edge cases (empty collections, zero values, overflows)

Output: for each cell — a list of coverage points annotated with type and source (CODEMANIFEST / code).

Step 3. Test Analysis

For each coverage point, determine whether an existing test covers it:

1. Enumerate all existing tests following goga-lang-disp conventions (naming, structure, assertion patterns).
2. Classify each test:
   • CONTRACT — validates contract points: signatures, types, return values, guarantees.
   • INTEGRATION — validates integration points: cross-cell calls, side effects, dependency handling.
3. For each coverage point, determine:
   • Whether it is covered by a test.
   • Which test covers it and its classification.
   • How thoroughly the test exercises this point.

Step 4. Coverage Assessment

For each coverage point from Step 2, cross-reference against the test analysis from Step 3:

1. Contract point — is there a contract test for it?
2. Integration point — is there an integration test for it?
3. Branch point / boundary point — is any test covering it?

Classify every uncovered point:

• CRITICAL GAP — public API contract not covered by any test.
• WARNING GAP — missing integration test for a cell with external dependencies, or uncovered boundary conditions.
• INFO GAP — recommendation to improve existing test quality.

Step 5. Test Execution

1. Run all tests for cells within the acceptance scope.
2. Record the outcome of each: passed / failed / error.
3. For every failure — diagnose the root cause.

Step 6. Test Proposals

For every CRITICAL and WARNING gap:

1. Determine the required test type (CONTRACT / INTEGRATION).
2. Describe what the test must verify.
3. Specify the target test file following goga-lang-disp conventions.
4. Offer the user a choice:
   • Auto-generate the tests.
   • Write the tests manually.
   • Accept the risk and skip tests.

STOP if:

• CRITICAL gaps exist in public API contract coverage.
• Any existing test fails.

---

Output Format

Complete every section. Empty sections are not permitted.

# Test Assessment Report

## Coverage Points
[Table: Cell | Coverage Point | Type (contract / branch / integration / boundary) | Source (CODEMANIFEST / code)]

## Existing Tests
[Table: Test Name | File | Type (CONTRACT / INTEGRATION) | What It Verifies | Status (passed / failed)]

## Coverage Assessment
[Table: Coverage Point | Covered by Test? | Test | Test Type | Coverage Completeness]

## Test Run Results
[Summary: total tests, passed, failed, errors]

## Coverage Gaps
[Table: Coverage Point | Gap Type (CRITICAL / WARNING / INFO) | Description]

## Proposed Tests
[Table: Test | Type (CONTRACT / INTEGRATION) | File | Coverage Point Addressed | Priority (CRITICAL / WARNING)]

## Overall Coverage Assessment
[EXCELLENT / ADEQUATE / INSUFFICIENT / CRITICAL_GAPS — with justification]