claude-mpm 4.25.10__py3-none-any.whl → 5.1.8__py3-none-any.whl

claude_mpm/skills/bundled/testing/testing-anti-patterns/references/detection-guide.md

@@ -1,569 +0,0 @@
-# Detection Guide: Identifying Testing Anti-Patterns
-
-Comprehensive guide for detecting testing anti-patterns before they cause problems. Includes red flags, warning signs, gate functions, and diagnostic checklists.
-
-## Overview
-
-Prevention is easier than cure. This guide helps you identify anti-patterns during code review, test writing, or debugging test failures.
-
-## Universal Detection Checklist
-
-Run before committing any test:
-
-```
-□ Am I asserting on mock elements? (testId='*-mock')
-  → If yes: STOP - Test real component or unmock
-
-□ Does this method only exist for tests?
-  → If yes: STOP - Move to test utilities
-
-□ Do I fully understand what I'm mocking?
-  → If no: STOP - Run with real impl first, then mock minimally
-
-□ Is my mock missing fields the real API has?
-  → If yes: STOP - Mirror complete API structure
-
-□ Did I write implementation before test?
-  → If yes: STOP - Delete impl, write test first (TDD)
-
-□ Is mock setup >50% of test code?
-  → If yes: Consider integration test with real components
-
-□ Can I explain what real behavior this test verifies?
-  → If no: STOP - Clarify what you're testing
-
-□ Would this test fail if I removed mocks?
-  → If no: You're testing mock behavior
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 1: Testing Mock Behavior
-
-### Red Flags
-
-**Code indicators:**
-```typescript
-// 🚩 Test ID contains "mock"
-expect(screen.getByTestId('sidebar-mock')).toBeInTheDocument();
-
-// 🚩 Asserting mock was called
-expect(mockFunction).toHaveBeenCalled();
-
-// 🚩 Checking mock return values
-expect(result).toBe(mockReturnValue);
-
-// 🚩 Test fails when mock removed
-// Remove mock → test fails → you're testing mock
-```
-
-**Language patterns:**
-- "Make sure the mock..."
-- "Test that component renders mock"
-- "Verify mock is present"
-- "Check if mock function called"
-
-**Diagnostic questions:**
-1. **"If I remove this mock, does test still make sense?"**
-   - No → You're testing mock behavior
-   - Yes → Good, test tests real behavior
-
-2. **"What production behavior does this verify?"**
-   - Can't answer → Testing mock behavior
-   - Clear answer → Good
-
-3. **"Would this test catch real bugs?"**
-   - No → Testing mock behavior
-   - Yes → Good
-
-### Detection Script
-
-```typescript
-// Run this check on your tests
-function detectsMockTesting(testFile: string): string[] {
-  const warnings: string[] = [];
-
-  // Pattern: testId with 'mock'
-  if (testFile.includes("getByTestId('") && testFile.includes('-mock')) {
-    warnings.push('Testing mock element by test ID');
-  }
-
-  // Pattern: expecting on mock objects
-  if (testFile.includes('expect(mock') && testFile.includes('toBe')) {
-    warnings.push('Asserting on mock values');
-  }
-
-  // Pattern: mock call assertions without behavior check
-  if (testFile.includes('toHaveBeenCalled') &&
-      !testFile.includes('expect(result)')) {
-    warnings.push('Only checking mock calls, not results');
-  }
-
-  return warnings;
-}
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 2: Test-Only Methods in Production
-
-### Red Flags
-
-**Code indicators:**
-```typescript
-// 🚩 Method only called in test files
-// Search: "destroy(" → Only in *.test.ts files
-
-// 🚩 Method names suggesting test use
-class Session {
-  reset()    // 🚩
-  destroy()  // 🚩
-  clear()    // 🚩
-  mock()     // 🚩
-}
-
-// 🚩 Comments acknowledging test-only use
-// "For testing only"
-// "Used by test cleanup"
-```
-
-**File analysis:**
-```bash
-# Find methods only called in tests
-grep -r "\.destroy\(" --include="*.ts" | grep -v ".test.ts"
-# If empty → method only in tests → move to test utils
-```
-
-**Diagnostic questions:**
-1. **"Is this method called outside test files?"**
-   - No → Test-only method, move to utilities
-   - Yes → Keep in production
-
-2. **"Would production code ever need this?"**
-   - No → Move to test utilities
-   - Yes → Keep in production
-
-3. **"Does this class own this resource's lifecycle?"**
-   - No → Wrong place for this method
-   - Yes → Consider if needed in production
-
-### Detection Script
-
-```typescript
-// Analyze method usage
-function findTestOnlyMethods(codebase: string[]): Report {
-  const methods = extractMethods(codebase);
-
-  return methods.filter(method => {
-    const usages = findUsages(method);
-    const testUsages = usages.filter(u => u.file.includes('.test.'));
-    const prodUsages = usages.filter(u => !u.file.includes('.test.'));
-
-    return testUsages.length > 0 && prodUsages.length === 0;
-  });
-}
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 3: Mocking Without Understanding
-
-### Red Flags
-
-**Code indicators:**
-```typescript
-// 🚩 Mocking without reading implementation
-vi.mock('SomeModule');  // What does it do? Unknown.
-
-// 🚩 "Just to be safe" mocking
-// Mock everything, understand nothing
-
-// 🚩 Test mysteriously fails/passes
-// You can't explain why
-
-// 🚩 Mock prevents test logic from working
-vi.mock('UserService');  // Breaks user creation test needs
-```
-
-**Language patterns:**
-- "I'll mock this to be safe"
-- "This might be slow"
-- "Let's mock everything"
-- "Not sure why test fails"
-
-**Diagnostic questions:**
-1. **"What side effects does the real method have?"**
-   - Can't answer → Don't mock yet
-   - Know all effects → Can mock safely
-
-2. **"Does my test depend on any of those side effects?"**
-   - Yes → Don't mock at this level
-   - No → Safe to mock
-
-3. **"Where is the actual slow/external operation?"**
-   - Unclear → Study code first
-   - Clear → Mock at that level
-
-### Detection Strategy
-
-**Before mocking:**
-```
-1. Read the implementation
-   - What does it do?
-   - What are side effects?
-   - What does it return?
-
-2. Run test with real implementation
-   - How slow is it? (measure!)
-   - What behavior occurs?
-   - What's actually needed?
-
-3. Identify minimal mock point
-   - Where is the slow/external operation?
-   - Can I mock below this level?
-   - What behavior must be preserved?
-
-4. Mock at correct level
-   - Mock boundary of slow operation
-   - Preserve logic test depends on
-   - Verify test still tests intended behavior
-```
-
-### Speed Measurement
-
-```typescript
-// Measure before mocking
-test('user registration', async () => {
-  const start = performance.now();
-  await registerUser(userData);
-  const duration = performance.now() - start;
-
-  console.log(`Test took ${duration}ms`);
-  // If <100ms → Don't mock
-  // If >1000ms → Identify slow part
-});
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 4: Incomplete Mocks
-
-### Red Flags
-
-**Code indicators:**
-```typescript
-// 🚩 Mock created from memory
-const mock = { id: '123' };  // What other fields exist?
-
-// 🚩 Partial type annotation
-const mock: Partial<User> = { id: '123' };
-
-// 🚩 Different tests, different mock shapes
-// test1.ts: { id, name }
-// test2.ts: { id, name, email, profile }
-
-// 🚩 Comment acknowledging incompleteness
-// "TODO: add more fields"
-// "Add fields as needed"
-```
-
-**Missing documentation:**
-- No reference to API docs
-- No TypeScript interface
-- No factory function
-- Copy-pasted mock variations
-
-**Diagnostic questions:**
-1. **"What does the real API return?"**
-   - Can't answer → Check docs before mocking
-   - Know structure → Use it in mock
-
-2. **"Am I using TypeScript types?"**
-   - No → Add types to enforce completeness
-   - Yes → Good
-
-3. **"Do other tests mock this differently?"**
-   - Yes → Inconsistent mocks, need factory
-   - No → Good
-
-### Detection Script
-
-```typescript
-// Find incomplete mocks
-function detectIncompleteMocks(testFile: string): Warning[] {
-  const warnings: Warning[] = [];
-
-  // Pattern: Partial<T> in test
-  if (testFile.includes('Partial<') && testFile.includes('mock')) {
-    warnings.push('Using Partial type for mock - likely incomplete');
-  }
-
-  // Pattern: Object literals without types
-  const mockPattern = /const mock\w+ = \{[^}]+\};/g;
-  const mocks = testFile.match(mockPattern);
-
-  if (mocks) {
-    mocks.forEach(mock => {
-      if (!mock.includes(': ')) {  // No type annotation
-        warnings.push('Mock without type annotation');
-      }
-    });
-  }
-
-  return warnings;
-}
-```
-
-### Completeness Checklist
-
-```
-□ Referenced API documentation
-□ Used TypeScript interface/type
-□ Included all required fields
-□ Included optional fields (as null/undefined)
-□ Nested objects complete
-□ Arrays have realistic length/content
-□ Metadata fields included
-□ Timestamps/IDs present
-```
-
-## Anti-Pattern 5: Tests as Afterthought
-
-### Red Flags
-
-**Process indicators:**
-```
-🚩 PR has implementation commits, then "add tests" commit
-🚩 "Ready for testing" status on untested feature
-🚩 Test coverage added after code review
-🚩 Tests written to pass, not fail first
-🚩 Implementation complete, tests pending
-```
-
-**Language patterns:**
-- "I'll add tests next"
-- "Implementation done, needs tests"
-- "Ready for testing phase"
-- "Tests coming soon"
-
-**Code indicators:**
-```typescript
-// 🚩 Tests that can't fail
-test('feature works', () => {
-  const result = newFeature();
-  expect(result).toBe(result);  // Always passes
-});
-
-// 🚩 Tests with no assertions
-test('feature runs', () => {
-  newFeature();  // No expect()
-});
-```
-
-**Diagnostic questions:**
-1. **"Did I write test before implementation?"**
-   - No → Not following TDD
-   - Yes → Good
-
-2. **"Did I watch test fail first?"**
-   - No → Can't verify test works
-   - Yes → Good
-
-3. **"Are there commits without tests?"**
-   - Yes → Tests afterthought
-   - No → Good
-
-### Git History Analysis
-
-```bash
-# Check if tests come after implementation
-git log --oneline --name-only | grep -A5 "feature"
-
-# Red flag pattern:
-# abc123 Add feature X
-#   src/feature.ts
-# def456 Add tests for feature X  ← Tests after
-#   src/feature.test.ts
-
-# Good pattern:
-# abc123 Add feature X with tests
-#   src/feature.test.ts  ← Test file in same commit
-#   src/feature.ts
-```
-
-## Warning Signs: When Mocks Become Too Complex
-
-### Complexity Indicators
-
-```typescript
-// 🚩 Mock setup longer than test
-const setup = 50 lines;
-const test = 10 lines;
-// Ratio > 3:1 → Too complex
-
-// 🚩 Mocking everything
-vi.mock('ModuleA');
-vi.mock('ModuleB');
-vi.mock('ModuleC');
-vi.mock('ModuleD');
-// 4+ mocks → Consider integration test
-
-// 🚩 Nested mock setup
-const mockA = { mock: mockB };
-const mockB = { mock: mockC };
-const mockC = { /* ... */ };
-
-// 🚩 Mock setup in beforeEach for single test
-beforeEach(() => {
-  // 30 lines of setup
-});
-
-test('one thing', () => {
-  // 5 lines
-});
-```
-
-**Your human partner's question:** "Do we need to be using a mock here?"
-
-**Consider:** Integration tests with real components often simpler than complex mocks.
-
-### Complexity Metrics
-
-```typescript
-function calculateMockComplexity(test: TestFile): ComplexityScore {
-  return {
-    mockCount: countMocks(test),           // >4 is high
-    setupLines: countSetupLines(test),     // >30 is high
-    setupToTestRatio: setupLines / testLines,  // >3 is high
-    mockNestingDepth: calculateNesting(test),  // >2 is high
-
-    recommendation: score > 10 ? 'Use integration test' : 'OK'
-  };
-}
-```
-
-## Comprehensive Code Review Checklist
-
-Use this when reviewing tests (yours or others'):
-
-### Structure
-```
-□ Test files exist for new code
-□ Tests in same commit as implementation
-□ Tests follow TDD pattern (fail first)
-□ Clear test names describe behavior
-```
-
-### Mock Usage
-```
-□ Mocks used sparingly (only when needed)
-□ Mock setup is simple (<20 lines)
-□ Mocks at correct level (I/O boundaries)
-□ No assertions on mock elements
-□ Complete mock structures (all fields)
-```
-
-### Production Code
-```
-□ No test-only methods in production classes
-□ No test-specific logic in production
-□ Clean separation of concerns
-□ No test imports in production code
-```
-
-### Test Quality
-```
-□ Tests verify real behavior
-□ Assertions on meaningful results
-□ Edge cases covered
-□ Error conditions tested
-□ Integration tests for critical paths
-```
-
-### Red Flags
-```
-□ No 'testId="*-mock"' assertions
-□ No Partial<T> for mocks
-□ No "for testing" comments in production
-□ No untested implementation commits
-```
-
-## Automated Detection Tools
-
-### ESLint Rules
-
-```javascript
-// .eslintrc.js
-module.exports = {
-  rules: {
-    // Prevent test-only methods
-    'no-restricted-syntax': [
-      'error',
-      {
-        selector: 'MethodDefinition[key.name=/^(reset|destroy|clear|mock)$/]',
-        message: 'Potential test-only method in production code'
-      }
-    ],
-
-    // Prevent mock test IDs
-    'testing-library/prefer-screen-queries': 'error',
-    'testing-library/no-node-access': 'error',
-  }
-};
-```
-
-### Pre-commit Hook
-
-```bash
-#!/bin/bash
-# .git/hooks/pre-commit
-
-# Check for mock test IDs
-if git diff --cached | grep -q "testId=.*-mock"; then
-  echo "Error: Found mock test ID in tests"
-  echo "Are you testing mock behavior?"
-  exit 1
-fi
-
-# Check for test-only methods
-if git diff --cached -- "*.ts" "*.js" | \
-   grep -v ".test." | \
-   grep -q "destroy()\|reset()\|clear()"; then
-  echo "Warning: Potential test-only method in production code"
-fi
-
-# Check test coverage
-npm test -- --coverage --coverageThreshold='{"global":{"lines":80}}'
-```
-
-## Quick Reference: Detection Summary
-
-| Anti-Pattern | Key Indicator | Quick Check |
-|--------------|---------------|-------------|
-| Testing Mock Behavior | testId='*-mock' | Remove mock - test still valid? |
-| Test-Only Methods | Method only in .test. files | grep production files |
-| Mocking Without Understanding | Can't explain why mocking | Read implementation first |
-| Incomplete Mocks | Partial<T> or no types | Check against API docs |
-| Tests as Afterthought | Implementation before tests | Check git history |
-
-## When to Seek Help
-
-**STOP and ask your human partner if:**
-- Mock setup exceeds 50 lines
-- You've mocked >5 modules in one test
-- Test mysteriously passes/fails
-- You can't explain what test verifies
-- Same test needs different mocks in different runs
-- Integration test seems simpler than mocks
-
-**Questions to ask:**
-- "Do we need to be using a mock here?"
-- "Should this be an integration test?"
-- "Am I testing the right thing?"
-- "Is this test-only method necessary?"
-
-## Prevention Mindset
-
-**Before writing any test:**
-1. Understand what you're testing (real behavior)
-2. Write test first (TDD)
-3. Watch it fail
-4. Minimal implementation
-5. Watch it pass
-6. Refactor
-
-**This workflow prevents all five anti-patterns naturally.**
-
-See [test-driven-development skill](../../test-driven-development/) for complete TDD workflow.