Skip to content

Update apptesting:execute's yaml format#9898

Merged
kaibolay merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
lk/tcic-format
Feb 10, 2026
Merged

Update apptesting:execute's yaml format#9898
kaibolay merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
lk/tcic-format

Conversation

@lfkellogg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@lfkellogg lfkellogg commented Feb 9, 2026

Description

Renames successCriteria to finalScreenAssertion to match new UX (b/483144211)

Scenarios Tested

Updated and ran unit tests.

Sample Commands

No change

@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @lfkellogg, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refactors the test configuration schema by renaming a key field. The change ensures consistency with new UX terminology, improving clarity and maintainability for defining test step assertions across the application and its test templates.

Highlights

  • Test Configuration Schema Update: The successCriteria field in test step definitions has been renamed to finalScreenAssertion to align with updated user experience terminology.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Changelog
  • src/apptesting/invokeTests.spec.ts
    • Renamed successCriteria to finalScreenAssertion in test case definitions.
  • src/apptesting/parseTestFiles.spec.ts
    • Updated test parsing logic to reflect the finalScreenAssertion field.
  • src/apptesting/types.ts
    • Modified the TestStep interface to use finalScreenAssertion instead of successCriteria.
  • templates/init/apptesting/smoke_test.yaml
    • Updated the smoke test template to use the new finalScreenAssertion field.
Activity
  • Unit tests were updated and executed to validate the changes.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request correctly renames successCriteria to finalScreenAssertion in the YAML-based app testing feature, updating the TestStep type, tests, and templates. The changes are consistent and align with the goal of matching the new UX.

I did notice that the old property name successCriteria is still used in what appears to be a separate, AI-driven testing feature within src/mcp/tools/apptesting/tests.ts and src/mcp/prompts/apptesting/run_test.ts. While these files are outside the scope of this PR, I recommend aligning the naming there as well in a future change to ensure consistency across all app testing functionalities. The changes in this PR are solid.

@lfkellogg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Code Review

This pull request correctly renames successCriteria to finalScreenAssertion in the YAML-based app testing feature, updating the TestStep type, tests, and templates. The changes are consistent and align with the goal of matching the new UX.

I did notice that the old property name successCriteria is still used in what appears to be a separate, AI-driven testing feature within src/mcp/tools/apptesting/tests.ts and src/mcp/prompts/apptesting/run_test.ts. While these files are outside the scope of this PR, I recommend aligning the naming there as well in a future change to ensure consistency across all app testing functionalities. The changes in this PR are solid.

I'll do this in a followup.

@kaibolay kaibolay enabled auto-merge (squash) February 10, 2026 03:28
@kaibolay kaibolay disabled auto-merge February 10, 2026 03:28
@kaibolay kaibolay enabled auto-merge (squash) February 10, 2026 03:28
@kaibolay kaibolay merged commit 40834c5 into main Feb 10, 2026
47 checks passed
@kaibolay kaibolay deleted the lk/tcic-format branch February 10, 2026 03:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants