Skip to content

docs(agents): require negative and boundary tests for enforcement logic #93

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
Teakowa merged 1 commit into from
Oct 19, 2026
Merged

docs(agents): require negative and boundary tests for enforcement logic #93

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions AGENTS.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ implementation.
the reference mock provider without protocol schema changes.
* Fixtures and conformance scenarios are versioned (`conformance/fixtures/v1/`)
so protocol evolution is testable across versions.
* Contract-enforcement logic (fixture validation, the provider-leaf matcher,
wire invariants) lands with tests that reject what the contract forbids and
accept what it allows, including boundary cases, in the same change.

## Validation contract

Expand Down
7 changes: 0 additions & 7 deletions docs/LESSONS.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,13 +9,6 @@ Short review queue of reusable failure classes from merged LPP work. Each entry
- **Prevention home:** conformance fixtures exercising each gated surface at each negotiated version; the spec's version-negotiation section.
- **Incidents:** [#40](https://github.com/wrightkit/language-provider-protocol/pull/40), [#46](https://github.com/wrightkit/language-provider-protocol/pull/46) — observed 2026-09-24, 2026-10-05

### A contract check must be exercised on both sides of the boundary

- **Rule:** New enforcement logic — an input invariant, a capability or leaf matcher — lands only with evidence that it rejects what the contract forbids and accepts what it allows.
- **Why:** The step request-shape invariant merged with no test for either invalid case; the provider-leaf matcher could weaken normative fixtures and misjudge provider results against the v1 spec, and still regressed after the first fix round.
- **Prevention home:** invalid-input and boundary fixtures per enforcement path. Escalation: #89.
- **Incidents:** [#51](https://github.com/wrightkit/language-provider-protocol/pull/51), [#53](https://github.com/wrightkit/language-provider-protocol/pull/53) — observed 2026-10-06

### A parity refactor must pin the baseline behavior it preserves

- **Rule:** Rewriting a parser, recovery, or matching path requires pinning the baseline's observable edge behavior in tests first; a refactor that changes observable recovery silently drops normative behavior.
Expand Down