Repository navigation
🧪 Identify core refusals and retained test observations - #916
Merged
Merged
Conversation
PR #916: 🧪 Identify core refusals and retained test observations10 files, +129 / -50 Scope✅ PR scope looks good. Structural✅ No structural bloat detected. Slop✅ Slop indicators look low. Static Analysis✅ Oxlint found no issues. CorrectnessNo extraneous code patterns detected. |
4 tasks done
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
Selected core and Workflow tests can accept an unrelated error as the refusal they describe. Structural readiness and retained-result failures also obscure which observation failed. This delivers the assigned core/Workflow and navigation slice of #914.
What changes
Before: a matcher replacement, generic Files error or unrelated hostile-provider fixture error can satisfy broad failure checks; Workspace observation maps every read error to absence.
After: assertions identify the original inner assertion, provider-unavailable classification and named hostile-answer refusals. Workspace observation accepts only documented ENOENT as absence and preserves other failures by identity. SR7 signals first delivery explicitly; SA4 identifies occurrence and retained result. Storage-view cases use WAC27–WAC29, preserving crash-recovery WAC24–WAC26. FL37/FX4 and Git source/emitted-copy evidence have accurate navigation.
What must stay true
How to verify it
deno task lint,deno task check,pnpm exec tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.node.jsonanddeno task check:jsrpassed; JSR ended withSuccess Dry run complete.Exact local commands, dispositions, controls and outputs:
/private/tmp/xmd-test-improvements-20261014/core-artifacts/handoff.mdand adjacent artifacts. Architect PASS covers signed head99862522eed42c44c32b050a1789be91244be6f6.Scope
This slice was developed on #915, exact reviewed base
39317e4e97281fb867eaf320583302b9b5801a4d; original main was62d1086703ec72ca6d3b6e90a596ee716c571237. #915 merged before publication. Current mainb037f2243733f34ea53fe4c3df5718119eb7b5cccontains that commit and has its identical tree, so this PR targets main with exactly the ten-file core/Workflow slice. It does not close #914: packaging, Web and script diagnostics have separate owners.Risks and limitations
Focused evidence establishes the selected assertions and preserves independent consumer boundaries; full runtime corpora remain CI-owned. The dependency merged before publication, so this PR targets main. Local evidence does not establish required remote checks, which remain the merge gate. No CI verdict was used or monitored during this work.
Scope confirmation