Add validation tests for GenAIGenerateContentOperator

[KL-2300032590]

This PR adds validation-focused unit tests for GenAIGenerateContentOperator
to ensure the operator fails fast when required parameters are missing.

This work contributes to #61261.

Notes:

• Tests only, no production code changes
• Avoids GenAIGeminiCreateBatchJobOperator as requested in Change serialization inside GenAIGeminiCreateBatchJobOperator #61253

[shahar1]

Good start!
Personally I don't find the tests you've implemented too practical, as ususally the type hints help us with figuring out such discrepancies (you could retain the tests though, they're not harmful 🙂).
Could you please try to test the execute method for the case where all required parameters are given?
Try to look at unit tests of other providers and learn how mocking works.
Please let me know if you need some direction.

[shahar1]

CI seems to fail now :(
Please let me know if you need some guidance.

[KL-2300032590]

CI seems to fail now :( Please let me know if you need some guidance.

@shahar1,
thanks for the review and the offer to help
CI is still failing across multiple provider/distribution jobs. Before making further changes, could you please point me to which specific assertion or behavior in the GenAI operator tests is incompatible with current expectations, or which check you’d recommend I focus on first?

[shahar1]

CI seems to fail now :( Please let me know if you need some guidance.
@shahar1,
thanks for the review and the offer to help
CI is still failing across multiple provider/distribution jobs. Before making further changes, could you please point me to which specific assertion or behavior in the GenAI operator tests is incompatible with current expectations, or which check you’d recommend I focus on first?

CI seems to fail now :( Please let me know if you need some guidance.

@shahar1, thanks for the review and the offer to help CI is still failing across multiple provider/distribution jobs. Before making further changes, could you please point me to which specific assertion or behavior in the GenAI operator tests is incompatible with current expectations, or which check you’d recommend I focus on first?

Hey, I'd like to let you know that I've made a mistake and the tests which I thought were missing, actually exist in this file:
https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/providers/google/tests/unit/google/cloud/operators/test_gen_ai.py#L142

I also overlooked that the test file you proposed was in the wrong path (it should be in providers/google/test/unit/google) which partially caused this confusion when reviewing this PR.

However, you may still use this PR to try and test the exceptions raised in the current source file and currently not tested, for example:

airflow/providers/google/src/airflow/providers/google/cloud/operators/gen_ai.py

Line 479 in af12a42

raise AirflowException(

Try to look at the current test file, as well as others - and then you could try to utilize this PR for working on the exceptions.
My sincere apologies for the mess, I'll convert this PR to draft for now. If you plan to reuse it for testing the exceptions, please comment.

[KL-2300032590]

CI seems to fail now :( Please let me know if you need some guidance.
@shahar1,
thanks for the review and the offer to help
CI is still failing across multiple provider/distribution jobs. Before making further changes, could you please point me to which specific assertion or behavior in the GenAI operator tests is incompatible with current expectations, or which check you’d recommend I focus on first?

CI seems to fail now :( Please let me know if you need some guidance.

@shahar1, thanks for the review and the offer to help CI is still failing across multiple provider/distribution jobs. Before making further changes, could you please point me to which specific assertion or behavior in the GenAI operator tests is incompatible with current expectations, or which check you’d recommend I focus on first?

Hey, I'd like to let you know that I've made a mistake and the tests which I thought were missing, actually exist in this file: https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/providers/google/tests/unit/google/cloud/operators/test_gen_ai.py#L142

I also overlooked that the test file you proposed was in the wrong path (it should be in providers/google/test/unit/google) which partially caused this confusion when reviewing this PR.

However, you may still use this PR to try and test the exceptions raised in the current source file and currently not tested, for example:

airflow/providers/google/src/airflow/providers/google/cloud/operators/gen_ai.py

Line 479 in af12a42

raise AirflowException(

Try to look at the current test file, as well as others - and then you could try to utilize this PR for working on the exceptions. My sincere apologies for the mess, I'll convert this PR to draft for now. If you plan to reuse it for testing the exceptions, please comment.

Hi @shahar1,

Thanks for the clarification — that makes sense now. I understand that the validation tests already exist and that the confusion was partly due to the test path.

I’m fine with repurposing this PR to focus only on currently untested exception paths in the GenAI operators (e.g. explicit AirflowExceptions).

Appreciate the guidance.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.