bcquality/microsoft/skills/review/al-testing-review.md
Jesper Schulz-Wedde ae04938c03
Emit human-readable domain label on review findings (#54)
* Emit human-readable domain label on review findings

Add an optional findings[].domain field to the DO review output contract so
each finding carries its own human-readable review-domain display label. Leaf
review skills set it on every finding they emit; the al-code-review super-skill
copies it verbatim during rollup and sets it to "Agent" for its own
cross-cutting agent findings. This decouples consumers from BCQuality's domain
taxonomy: they render finding.domain verbatim instead of maintaining a
sub-skill-id -> label map.

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

* Define domain display-label constraints

Clarify that review domains may contain internal whitespace, punctuation, case-sensitive text, and non-ASCII characters. Require consumers to preserve and safely encode the complete label instead of relying on lossy slugs, matching the replacement BC-ALAgents consumer.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 77d0a40e-8bf5-40ac-a450-40eb0255db03

---------

Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-07-15 10:44:50 +02:00

131 lines
12 KiB
Markdown

---
kind: action-skill
id: al-testing-review
version: 1
title: AL testing review
description: Performs an AL testing review against guidance from BCQuality.
inputs: [pr-diff, file-path]
outputs: [findings-report]
bc-version: [all]
technologies: [al]
countries: [w1]
application-area: [all]
---
# AL testing review
Reviews AL source changes against the `testing` knowledge domain in BCQuality and emits a findings report. This is a leaf action skill: it invokes no sub-skills. It is one of the skills composed by `al-code-review`.
An orchestrator invokes this skill with either a `pr-diff` (the standard PR-review entry point) or a `file-path` (single-file review). Testing findings are narrow by design — they apply when the diff touches test codeunits, test runners, test methods, handlers, assertions, or fixture construction. The skill returns `not-applicable` when none of those apply.
## Source
Read the BCQuality knowledge index once — the `knowledge-index.json` BCQuality builds at the root of the knowledge checkout (Entry's preparation step regenerates it over the live, already-filtered clone — see `skills/entry.md`). It lists every article that survived layer and allow/deny filtering and carries, per article, its `path`, `layer`, `domain`, frontmatter dimensions, `keywords`, `title`, and a one-line `description` hint — exactly the fields Relevance and Worklist consume. Take the index entries whose `domain` is `testing` as this skill's candidate set across every enabled layer; do not open the individual article files at this step. Open an article's full body only once it enters the Worklist below, so a review reads the index plus the handful of worklisted articles instead of every file under `*/knowledge/testing/**`.
## Relevance
Apply the frontmatter matching rules defined in READ (*Frontmatter matching semantics*) against the task context:
- `bc-version` — the target BC version from the PR branch's `app.json` or the orchestrator-supplied version. If unavailable, the dimension is `unknown`.
- `technologies``[al]`.
- `countries` — the countries declared in the consuming app's `app.json`. Default to the orchestrator's configured context; if absent, `unknown`.
- `application-area` — the union of application areas declared by the changed objects. Pass the actual set; do not substitute `[all]`. If the area cannot be determined from the changes, the dimension is `unknown`.
Discard files that are not applicable. Retain conditionally applicable files (any dimension `unknown`) only when the orchestrator's configuration permits them; findings derived from those files MUST have `confidence` no higher than `medium`, AND the finding's `message` MUST name the dimension or dimensions that were unknown.
## Worklist
Narrow the relevant files to the subset that applies to the changes under review. For each relevant file, compute overlap against:
- The changed AL object names and types — especially codeunits with `Subtype = Test`, test runner codeunits with `TestIsolation`, test libraries, and codeunits that define UI handlers.
- The changed methods and attributes, weighted toward `[Test]`, `[TransactionModel(...)]`, `[HandlerFunctions(...)]`, handler attributes, `asserterror`, `ExpectedError`, `ExpectedErrorCode`, fixture initialization, and test-library calls.
- Tokens extracted from the diff that relate to testing (`Subtype = Test`, `TestIsolation`, `TransactionModel`, `AutoRollback`, `AutoCommit`, `Commit`, `asserterror`, `ExpectedError`, `ExpectedErrorCode`, `HandlerFunctions`, `ConfirmHandler`, `MessageHandler`, `StrMenuHandler`, `ModalPageHandler`, `Enqueue`, `Dequeue`, `AssertEmpty`, `Library Assert`, `LibraryVariableStorage`, `LibrarySales`, `LibraryPurchase`, `LibraryERM`, `LibraryInventory`, `LibraryRandom`, `Init`, `Insert`).
A file enters the candidate worklist when its `keywords` intersect the extracted tokens or its topic (derived from the index entry's `path`, `title`, and `description`) matches a changed object type. Read an article's full file — its `## Best Practice` / `## Anti Pattern` bodies — only after it makes the worklist; candidate selection uses the index alone. When the diff contains no testing-related changes by any of the above signals, return `outcome: "not-applicable"` without evaluating files.
The following targeted checks cover every current `testing` article. Treat each as a candidate-selection cue: when the signal appears in changed code, add the named article to the worklist and evaluate it in Action.
- A method in a `Subtype = Test` codeunit adds or changes `[TransactionModel(...)]`, exercises code that calls `Commit`, defaults broadly to `AutoCommit`, or uses `AutoCommit` (or exercises a path that calls `Commit`) without a `TestIsolation`-enabled runner — `transactionmodel-attribute-governs-test-transactions`. Do not worklist this article solely because an ordinary `AutoRollback` or read-only test has no `TestIsolation` runner.
- Test fixture code manually calls `Init`/`Insert`, invents keys or prerequisite records, or bypasses available `LibrarySales`, `LibraryPurchase`, `LibraryERM`, `LibraryInventory`, `LibraryRandom`, or equivalent library codeunits — `use-library-codeunits-for-test-fixtures`.
- `asserterror` is added or changed without a following `Assert.ExpectedError`, `Assert.ExpectedErrorCode`, or a purpose-built assertion such as `ExpectedTestFieldError``asserterror-needs-expectederror-and-code`.
- A test path raises UI, `[HandlerFunctions(...)]` does not exactly match the invoked handlers, a handler hardcodes replies instead of using enqueue/dequeue expectations, or `LibraryVariableStorage.Clear`/`AssertEmpty` is missing — `ui-handlers-in-tests`.
Once the candidate worklist is known, resolve layer-precedence conflicts per READ. Drop lower-precedence files whose normative guidance (`## Best Practice` or `## Anti Pattern`) directly contradicts a higher-precedence candidate, and record each dropped file in `suppressed` with `reason: "layer-precedence"`. Files that would have been candidates but are hidden because their layer is disabled in consumer configuration are recorded with `reason: "configuration"`. Files that never became candidates are NOT recorded in `suppressed`.
When the post-conflict worklist is empty because no applicable testing knowledge exists, or because configuration suppressed every candidate, emit `outcome: "no-knowledge"`. When the worklist is empty because no applicable testing knowledge matched the changes, emit `outcome: "completed"` with an empty `findings` array.
## Action
For each worklist entry, evaluate the diff against the file's `## Best Practice` and `## Anti Pattern` sections. Emit findings as follows:
- When the diff contains a clear match for an Anti Pattern, emit a finding with severity `major` or `blocker`, a message summarizing the anti-pattern, `location` pointing to the offending line or range, and a `references` entry pointing to the knowledge file. Use `blocker` only when the test can pass while verifying the wrong behavior or can leave committed data that contaminates later tests; otherwise the ceiling is `major`.
- When the diff contains code that contradicts a Best Practice without being a full anti-pattern, emit `minor` with the same reference shape.
- When the skill cannot detect a violation but the file is clearly applicable to the change, emit `info` citing the file.
Set `confidence` to:
- `high` when the detection is based on an unambiguous pattern match (attribute, handler declaration, assertion sequence, or fixture call).
- `medium` when detection relies on heuristics or when any frontmatter dimension was `unknown`.
- `low` when the finding is an advisory derived only from applicability.
After evaluating each worklist entry, also consider whether the diff exhibits a testing defect the agent recognises from its general AL knowledge that no knowledge file in the worklist covers. Such candidates are agent findings within this skill's domain — emit them with `references: []`, an `id` slug prefixed with `agent:`, `confidence` capped at `medium`, `severity` capped at `minor` (agent findings are advisory and non-gating), and a `message` that is self-contained (describing both the issue and a concrete recommendation, since there is no knowledge-file footer for the consumer to fall back on). Hold every candidate to the precision bar in `skills/do.md` (*Agent findings*): emit only a concrete, material testing defect a knowledgeable BC reviewer would agree is wrong — steelman it first and drop anything stylistic, speculative, dependent on code outside the diff, or merely a valid alternative; when in doubt, omit. The scope is strictly AL testing; defects outside this domain belong to other leaves and MUST NOT be emitted here. Before emitting, check the worklist for a knowledge file that matches the candidate — if one exists, upgrade the candidate to a knowledge-backed finding instead. See `skills/do.md` for the full contract.
For every emitted finding, decide whether the fix is mechanical. A fix is mechanical when it is small, local, and unambiguous from the diff context (for example: add the matching `ExpectedError` assertion after `asserterror`; add or remove a handler name in `HandlerFunctions`; add `LibraryVariableStorage.Clear` or `AssertEmpty`; or replace hand-rolled fixture creation with an evident library call). For mechanical findings, emit `findings[].suggested-code` with the literal replacement for the source lines indicated by `location`. The payload must be a verbatim replacement — no diff markers, no fences, no commentary — that the consumer can render as a one-click suggestion. When a `.good.al` companion exists and the diff context matches the `.bad.al` shape, adapt the `.good.al` replacement into `suggested-code`.
Omit `suggested-code` only when the appropriate fix depends on context the skill cannot determine, when multiple defensible replacements exist, or when the fix spans non-contiguous code. If a finding is mechanical-looking but you omit `suggested-code`, set `findings[].suggested-code-omission-reason` to a short explanation. See `skills/do.md` for the full contract.
Outcome selection:
- `completed` — the skill evaluated every worklist item.
- `no-knowledge` — no applicable testing knowledge survived filtering.
- `not-applicable` — the diff touches no test codeunit, runner, method, handler, assertion, or fixture surface.
- `partial` — a budget was hit before the worklist was exhausted.
- `failed` — an unrecoverable error occurred.
## Output
Output conforms to the DO output contract. Every finding this skill emits MUST set `findings[].domain` to `"Testing"`. A populated example:
```json
{
"skill": { "id": "al-testing-review", "version": 1 },
"outcome": "completed",
"summary": {
"counts": { "blocker": 0, "major": 1, "minor": 0, "info": 0 },
"coverage": { "worklist-size": 1, "items-evaluated": 1 }
},
"findings": [
{
"id": "microsoft/knowledge/testing/asserterror-needs-expectederror-and-code.md",
"severity": "major",
"message": "The negative test uses asserterror without checking the resulting message or error code, so any unrelated setup or permission error can make the test pass.",
"location": {
"file": "test/SalesPostingTests.Codeunit.al",
"line": 42
},
"references": [
{ "path": "microsoft/knowledge/testing/asserterror-needs-expectederror-and-code.md" }
],
"confidence": "high",
"domain": "Testing",
"suggested-code": "asserterror PostInvalidOrder();\nAssert.ExpectedError(ExpectedPostingErr);"
}
],
"suppressed": []
}
```
The empty-corpus case produces:
```json
{
"skill": { "id": "al-testing-review", "version": 1 },
"outcome": "no-knowledge",
"summary": {
"counts": { "blocker": 0, "major": 0, "minor": 0, "info": 0 },
"coverage": { "worklist-size": 0, "items-evaluated": 0 }
},
"findings": [],
"suppressed": []
}
```