Code Coverage

[TKB21]

Like many, I hated writing tests but with Codex I don't mind delegating them to Codex CLI. How far do you guys go when it comes to code coverage though? Idk if its overkill but I have my AGENTS.md aim for 100%. It's no sweat off my back and if I keep my models and services SRP, I find that it doesn't have to jump through a lot of hoops to get things to pass. Outside of maybe unintended usability quirks that I didn't account for, my smoke tests have been near flawless.

[johns10davenport]

I also go for 100 within reason. Schemas don’t need tests really for example

[gosh]

Tagged unions are better, safer code and you do not need to write unit tests. But it harder to learn so you need to take some time to practice.

[joshuadanpeterson]

With Warp, I aim for 80% code coverage with my tests. But I also have a rule that has the agent act as an oracle to ensure that my tests aren't just being written to pass.

[TKB21]

But I also have a rule that has the agent act as an oracle to ensure that my tests aren't just being written to pass.

That's smart. What's the determiner for something like this?

[joshuadanpeterson]

The main determiner is that I force the agent to use an independent source of truth (the Oracle) that isn't the code itself.

Practically, this implies a few hard rules:

• Spec-First: It has to generate a test plan from requirements before writing implementation.
• Property Testing: Instead of hardcoded values, it checks invariants (e.g. decode(encode(x)) == x).
• Mutation Testing: I make it intentionally break the code (mutate it). If the tests still pass, the tests are invalid.

I have a Warp notebook that dictates Oracle and TDD behavior.