fix(doc): tighten remediation hint + add E2E dry-run suppression test#581
Merged
fangshuyu-768 merged 1 commit intofeat/docs-update-semantic-checkfrom Apr 21, 2026
Conversation
Two CodeRabbit nits from #569: 1. Unit test hint assertion only checked for `delete_range` in the remediation message; the companion `insert_before` half of the guidance could regress undetected. Broaden the assertion to require both tokens so a future edit that drops half the remediation produces an immediate test failure. 2. No E2E coverage proved the dry-run contract in the PR description ("Not emitted in dry-run mode — kept quiet during planning"). The helper itself is unit-tested, but nothing caught a regression where a later refactor wired docsUpdateWarnings into the DryRun path. Add tests/cli_e2e/docs/docs_update_dryrun_test.go: TestDocs_UpdateDryRunSuppressesSemanticWarnings invokes `docs +update --dry-run --mode=replace_range --markdown "***x***\n\nb"` — an input crafted to trip BOTH pre-write warnings — and asserts neither the "warning:" prefix, the blank-line message, nor the combined-emphasis message appears on stdout or stderr. Note: the file needs -f to add because .gitignore has a bare `docs/` rule that accidentally matches tests/cli_e2e/docs/. The existing tracked files under that directory predate the rule; new additions have to be force-added until the ignore pattern is narrowed. Not worth rewriting .gitignore for one file. Verified manually that the new E2E fails cleanly when warnings are injected into DryRun and passes again after reverting — the test has real regression-detection power, not just a sticker.
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
fangshuyu-768 seems not to be a GitHub user. You need a GitHub account to be able to sign the CLA. If you have already a GitHub account, please add the email address used for this commit to your account. You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it. |
github-actions
Bot
added
domain/ccm
fangshuyu-768
merged commit 8bec6eb
into
feat/docs-update-semantic-check
2 of 3 checks passed
fangshuyu-768
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2026
* feat(doc): add pre-write semantic warnings to docs +update Two static checks run before the MCP update-doc call: 1. replace_* + blank-line markdown: replace_range / replace_all only swap text inside an existing block — a \n\n in the payload will render as literal text, not a paragraph break. Hint to use delete_range + insert_before instead. 2. Combined bold+italic emphases (***text***, **_text_**, _**text**_) cannot round-trip through Lark and are silently downgraded to a single emphasis. Hint to split into two separate emphases. Both warnings go to stderr and never block the update — they inform, not gate. Adds table-driven tests for each check plus an aggregation test, and wires the checks into Execute right before CallMCPTool. Closes the first batch of items from the docs +update pitfalls review (Cases 1 and 5). * fix(doc): exclude code regions and escaped markers from docs +update checks (#578) * fix(doc): exclude code regions and escaped markers from docs +update checks Addresses the three review comments on #569: the blank-line paragraph check and the bold+italic emphasis check both operate on the raw markdown string, so fenced code blocks / inline code spans / literal escaped markers produce false-positive warnings on content users expect to pass through verbatim. Changes: - Add proseHasBlankLine(): fence-aware detector that returns true only when a blank line sits outside of ```...``` or ~~~...~~~ regions. Replaces the raw strings.Contains("\n\n") check in checkDocsUpdateReplaceMultilineMarkdown. - Add stripMarkdownCodeRegions(): blanks out fenced code lines and masks inline code spans (via scanInlineCodeSpans from markdown_fix.go) with equal-length whitespace so byte offsets outside the stripped regions are preserved. - Add stripEscapedEmphasisMarkers(): removes "\*" and "\_" so literal sequences like "\***text***" — which CommonMark renders as a literal asterisk plus bold — don't match the combined bold+italic regex. - Wire both helpers into checkDocsUpdateBoldItalic(): the regex now runs on stripEscapedEmphasisMarkers(stripMarkdownCodeRegions(markdown)), so code samples and escaped markers are sanitized away before detection. Shared fence-parsing helpers (codeFenceOpenMarker, isCodeFenceClose, leadingRun) are kept local to this file to avoid touching files outside the scope of the reviewed PR. If a future change wants to reuse them across the doc package, they can be promoted then. Tests: - TestCheckDocsUpdateReplaceMultilineMarkdown: add 4 negative/positive cases — blank line inside backtick and tilde fences (no flag), blank line in prose while fence also has blanks (flag wins), fenced code with no blank lines (no flag). - TestCheckDocsUpdateBoldItalic: add 9 cases — ***text*** / **_text_** / _**text**_ inside fenced code (backtick and tilde), inside inline code spans, and escaped \***text*** / \*\*_text_\*\* (none flagged); plus two positive cases to verify the strip doesn't over-sanitize (real emphasis in prose still fires when inline/fenced code is nearby). * fix(doc): close CommonMark gaps and add three more combined-emphasis shapes Self-review of the first commit turned up three issues: - isCodeFenceClose was strict on exact marker length. Per CommonMark §4.5, a closing fence must be at least as long as the opener, not exactly the same length. A 3-backtick open legitimately closed by a 4-backtick closer (used to embed triple-backticks inside the code sample) was left open-ended, causing the rest of the document to be treated as code and both checks to silently skip it. - Both fence helpers accepted any amount of leading whitespace because they ran on strings.TrimSpace(line). CommonMark allows 0..3 leading spaces before a fence marker; 4+ spaces (or any tab in leading position, which expands to 4 columns) makes the line indented code block content, not a fence open/close. Indented fence-like lines now correctly remain prose and blank lines around them are detected. - The bold/italic check only covered three of the six documented combined-emphasis shapes. Added ___text___, __*text*__, and *__text__* so parity with the asterisk variants is complete. The regex set is now table-driven (combinedEmphasisPatterns) to make adding future shapes a one-line change. Implementation changes: - New fenceIndentOK(line) helper: returns (body, true) for 0..3 leading spaces with no tabs, else (_, false). Used by both codeFenceOpenMarker and isCodeFenceClose. - isCodeFenceClose now counts the fence-char run and accepts any run length >= len(marker), with trailing whitespace only. - checkDocsUpdateBoldItalic replaced three named var regexes with a table of six {shape, re} entries and a single early-exit loop. - Updated docsUpdateWarnings top docstring to list all six shapes. - Noted the known limitation of stripEscapedEmphasisMarkers around doubled backslash escapes ("\\***text***"), which is a false negative we accept in exchange for keeping this a simple string replace. Test additions (docs_update_check_test.go): - Fence close: longer-marker close correctly ends fence; real prose blank after a longer-close fence is still detected. - Indentation: 4-space indented fence-like line is not a fence open, so a surrounding blank line still flags; tab-indented variant same; 3-space indented fence is still a real fence. - New shapes: ___text___ positive + all three negative-guards (fenced code, inline code, escaped); __*text*__ and *__text__* positive + fenced/inline negative-guards; plus two composition tests to ensure the strip does not over-sanitize across the six-regex alternative set. All 53 sub-tests in this file pass; go vet and gofmt are clean. --------- Co-authored-by: fangshuyu-768 <shuyufang768@outlook.com> * fix(doc): address CodeRabbit review on docs +update warnings (#581) Two CodeRabbit nits from #569: 1. Unit test hint assertion only checked for `delete_range` in the remediation message; the companion `insert_before` half of the guidance could regress undetected. Broaden the assertion to require both tokens so a future edit that drops half the remediation produces an immediate test failure. 2. No E2E coverage proved the dry-run contract in the PR description ("Not emitted in dry-run mode — kept quiet during planning"). The helper itself is unit-tested, but nothing caught a regression where a later refactor wired docsUpdateWarnings into the DryRun path. Add tests/cli_e2e/docs/docs_update_dryrun_test.go: TestDocs_UpdateDryRunSuppressesSemanticWarnings invokes `docs +update --dry-run --mode=replace_range --markdown "***x***\n\nb"` — an input crafted to trip BOTH pre-write warnings — and asserts neither the "warning:" prefix, the blank-line message, nor the combined-emphasis message appears on stdout or stderr. Note: the file needs -f to add because .gitignore has a bare `docs/` rule that accidentally matches tests/cli_e2e/docs/. The existing tracked files under that directory predate the rule; new additions have to be force-added until the ignore pattern is narrowed. Not worth rewriting .gitignore for one file. Verified manually that the new E2E fails cleanly when warnings are injected into DryRun and passes again after reverting — the test has real regression-detection power, not just a sticker. Co-authored-by: fangshuyu-768 <shuyufang768@outlook.com>
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
2 participants
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.
Summary
Second follow-up on #569, closing the two CodeRabbit review nits (both
Minorseverity). Targetingfeat/docs-update-semantic-checkso it lands together with #569 and the earlier #578 follow-up.Changes
Comment 1 — tighten remediation-hint assertion (
docs_update_check_test.go:150)The previous assertion only checked for
delete_rangein the warning message;insert_before(the other half of the recommended remediation) could be dropped without failing any test.Comment 2 — new E2E dry-run suppression test (
tests/cli_e2e/docs/docs_update_dryrun_test.go)The PR #569 description commits to "Not emitted in dry-run mode (kept quiet during planning)", but nothing at the E2E layer protected that contract. A later refactor that moved
docsUpdateWarningsinto a shared code path could silently regress it.The new test invokes:
which is crafted to trip both pre-write warnings (blank-line + combined-emphasis). The assertion requires that neither the
warning:prefix, the blank-line message, nor the combined-emphasis message appears on stdout or stderr.Regression-detection check (performed locally, not committed)
Before committing, I temporarily wired
docsUpdateWarningsintoDryRun, rebuilt the binary, and re-ran the E2E test. It failed as expected, citing the injected warnings in stderr. Reverted, rebuilt, re-ran — passes. The test has real teeth.Caveat worth flagging
tests/cli_e2e/docs/docs_update_dryrun_test.goneedsgit add -fto track, because the repo's.gitignorehas a baredocs/rule on line 24 that accidentally matchestests/cli_e2e/docs/(same directory name). Existing files under that path are grandfathered in viagit add -fat creation; new additions default to ignored. Not in scope for this PR — worth a separate cleanup of.gitignoreto narrow to/docs/(repo root only).Test plan
go test ./shortcuts/doc/...— all unit tests pass (including the tightened assertion)go test ./tests/cli_e2e/docs/...— new E2E passesgo build -o lark-cli ./— binary rebuild needed since E2E exec'slark-cligofmt+go vetclean