Repository navigation
[autopilot] skills: distinguish smoke observations from assertions - #165
Merged
Merged
Conversation
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Adds a focused section to the Python testing skill distinguishing smoke observations from regression assertions, with an explicit UI assertion and guidance on checking an already-open view.
Motivating pattern: smoke scenarios can record replacement behavior or stale completion text and still print PASS because they only collect observations. A merged product fix does not turn those scenarios into regression guards. Readers learn to assert the intended outcome and verify that restoring the old behavior makes the assertion fail.
Validation: skill validator passed; all 62 tests passed under both pytest and unittest on Python 3.12; git diff --check passed. Only the existing testing skill changed.