DevOps AI Toolkit

# PRD: Integration Testing Framework for DevOps AI Toolkit **Issue**: #111 **Created**: 2025-01-19 **Completed**: 2025-09-30 **Status**: Complete **Priority**: Medium **Owner**: Claude Code ## Executive Summary Build a comprehensive integration testing framework that validates all dot-ai tools work correctly with real Kubernetes clusters and external dependencies. This framework leverages the REST API gateway to provide simple HTTP-based testing that can run in CI/CD pipelines and local development environments. **Key Strategy**: Replace all unit tests with integration tests. The end goal is zero unit tests, as dot-ai's value lies entirely in integrating Kubernetes, AI, and databases - testing these in isolation with mocks provides false confidence. ## Problem Statement ### Current Challenges - Testing relies primarily on unit tests with mocked dependencies - No validation that tools work correctly with real Kubernetes clusters - Difficult to test complex scenarios involving multiple tools and dependencies - Manual testing required for each release to verify functionality - No automated regression testing for tool integrations - Integration issues discovered late in development cycle ### User Impact - **Development Teams**: Risk of shipping bugs that only appear in real environments - **QA Teams**: Manual testing burden for complex integration scenarios - **Platform Teams**: Lack of confidence in tool reliability for production use - **Contributors**: Difficulty testing changes without complex local setup ## Success Criteria - All dot-ai tools have comprehensive integration tests - **All unit tests eliminated** (phased removal as integration tests prove coverage) - Tests run automatically in CI/CD pipeline - Test suite covers real Kubernetes cluster interactions - Failed tests provide actionable debugging information - Test execution time under 15 minutes for full suite - Easy to add tests for new tools without framework changes - Tests are self-documenting using BDD-style scenario descriptions - Integration tests use real AI (Claude Haiku) for realistic validation - Zero mock maintenance burden ## Scope ### In Scope - HTTP-based integration tests using REST API gateway - Real Kubernetes cluster integration (test clusters) - Test data management and cleanup - CI/CD pipeline integration - Test reporting and failure analysis - Coverage tracking for tool functionality - Local development testing support ### Out of Scope - Performance/load testing (separate initiative) - Security penetration testing (separate security initiative) - Multi-cluster testing scenarios (single cluster focus) - Production environment testing (test clusters only) - Maintaining unit tests (will be eliminated entirely) - TestDocs tool integration testing (deferred - not critical for core deployment/remediation workflows) ## Requirements ### Functional Requirements 1. **Tool Test Coverage** - Integration tests for all existing tools (recommend, remediate, deploy, etc.) - Tests cover primary use cases and error scenarios - Validation of tool outputs and side effects - Cross-tool interaction testing where applicable 2. **Kubernetes Integration** - Tests run against real Kubernetes clusters - Automatic test cluster setup and teardown - Test namespace isolation and cleanup - Kubernetes resource lifecycle testing 3. **Test Data Management** - Reusable test fixtures and scenarios - **Namespace-based isolation**: Each test creates unique namespace - **Simple cleanup**: Delete namespace cascades to all resources - **No resource tracking needed**: Namespace deletion handles everything - Test data versioning and consistency - Parameterized tests for different configurations 4. **CI/CD Integration** - Tests run on every pull request - Clear pass/fail reporting - Integration with existing GitHub Actions - Test results available in PR status checks 5. **Local Development** - Easy test execution for developers - **Selective test execution** (single file, test suite, or pattern matching) - Fast feedback loop for test failures (15-30s for single test) - Persistent cluster option for rapid iteration - Minimal setup requirements - Clear documentation for running tests ### Non-Functional Requirements - **Performance**: Full test suite completes within 15 minutes (3-5 minutes with parallelism) - **Individual Test Performance**: Complex workflow tests complete within 10-15 seconds - **Development Iteration**: Single test execution in 15-30 seconds with persistent cluster - **Parallel Execution**: Support 10-20 concurrent test workers - **Reliability**: Tests pass consistently with <1% flake rate - **Maintainability**: New tools automatically included in test framework - **Resource Management**: Namespace-based cleanup with async deletion (no waiting) - **Isolation**: Each test runs in unique namespace, perfect isolation - **Debuggability**: Clear error messages and logs for test failures - **Readability**: Tests organized by user scenarios, not technical implementation - **Simplicity**: No resource tracking, namespace deletion handles all cleanup ## Technical Design ### Architecture Overview ``` GitHub Actions → Test Runner → REST API Gateway → dot-ai Tools → Test Kubernetes Cluster ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ Test Reports ← Result Validation ← Tool Responses ← Cluster State ↓ Claude Haiku API (Test AI Model) ``` ### Design Decisions #### AI Strategy for Testing - **Decision**: Use Claude 3 Haiku for all integration tests - **Model**: `claude-3-haiku-20240307` - **Rationale**: - 2-3x faster than production Sonnet model (0.8-2.5s vs 2-5s) - 12x cheaper ($0.25/$1.25 per 1M tokens vs $3/$15) - Same Anthropic SDK - no code changes needed - Provides real AI behavior validation - **Configuration**: ```typescript const testAI = new Anthropic({ apiKey: process.env.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY // Same key for all models }); const response = await testAI.messages.create({ model: process.env.CLAUDE_MODEL || 'claude-3-haiku-20240307', max_tokens: 2048, temperature: 0 // Maximum determinism }); ``` #### Model Configuration Implementation - **Approach**: Environment variable based model switching - **Implementation**: ```typescript // src/core/claude.ts - Single line change needed const stream = await this.client.messages.create({ model: process.env.CLAUDE_MODEL || 'claude-3-5-sonnet-20241022', // ... rest of configuration }); ``` - **Test Setup**: ```bash # .env.test or test setup ANTHROPIC_API_KEY=sk-ant-api03-xxxxx # Same key as production CLAUDE_MODEL=claude-3-haiku-20240307 # Override model for tests ``` #### Test Organization Strategy - **Decision**: BDD-style scenario-based test organization - **Rationale**: Tests serve as living documentation - **Structure**: - Tests grouped by user scenarios (`scenarios/`) - User journey tests (`journeys/`) - Named by business value, not technical implementation - Example: `crashloop-remediation.scenario.test.ts` #### Infrastructure Approach - **Decision**: Use real Kubernetes test clusters with pre-built Kind images - **Implementation**: Custom Kind node images with pre-installed operators - **Rationale**: - Mocking would create unrealistic tests - Pre-built images enable fast cluster creation (~10s) - Guarantees clean state for each test run - No complex cleanup logic needed - **Real Operations Include**: - `kubectl api-resources` (~0.5-2s) - `kubectl get crd` (~0.5-1s) - Resource discovery and deployment - Actual cluster state validation #### Test Cluster Strategy - **Hybrid Approach**: - **Development**: Persistent cluster with resource cleanup after each test - **CI/CD**: Fresh cluster per test run using pre-built images - **Development Lifecycle**: Create Once → Run Many Tests (with cleanup) → Manual Destroy - **CI/CD Lifecycle**: Create → Run Tests → Destroy - **Image Contents**: - Base: `kindest/node:v1.29.0` - Pre-installed: CloudNativePG operator - Pre-pulled: Common container images - **Cluster Configuration for Parallel Tests**: - Increased pod limits (200 pods) - Higher connection limits - Tuned resource quotas - **Benefits**: - Development: Fast iteration without repeated cluster creation - CI/CD: Clean, reproducible environment - Both: Guaranteed clean state between tests ### Core Components 1. **Test Framework** (`tests/integration/`) - HTTP client for REST API gateway - Kubernetes client for cluster validation - Test utilities and helpers - Assertion and validation libraries 2. **Test Suites** - **Scenario Tests** (`tests/integration/scenarios/`) - Real-world problem scenarios - Example: `crashloop-remediation.scenario.test.ts` - **Journey Tests** (`tests/integration/journeys/`) - End-to-end user workflows - Example: `deploy-application.journey.test.ts` - **Tool Tests** (`tests/integration/tools/`) - Individual tool validation - Error cases and edge conditions 3. **Test Infrastructure** (`tests/integration/infrastructure/`) - Pre-built Kind image configuration - Cluster creation/destruction scripts - Operator pre-installation manifests - Test data fixtures - Image build automation - Namespace management utilities 4. **Test Helpers** (`tests/integration/helpers/`) - **IntegrationTest base class**: Handles namespace lifecycle - **Common assertions**: `expectPodRunning`, `expectServiceReachable` - **Resource builders**: For complex but common resources - **Scenario builders**: Reusable test scenarios - Balance: Keep test logic visible, extract infrastructure only 5. **CI/CD Integration** (`.github/workflows/`) - Integration test workflow with parallel execution - Test cluster provisioning with resource tuning - Test result reporting and timing metrics - Artifact collection and storage - Parallel test configuration ### Test Execution Flow 1. **Setup Phase** - Create Kind cluster from pre-built image (~10s) - Verify pre-installed operators (CNPG) - Deploy dot-ai with REST API gateway - Cluster ready with all dependencies 2. **Test Execution** - **Each test creates unique namespace** (test-{workerId}-{name}-{timestamp}) - All resources created within test namespace - Run tool-specific integration tests - Validate responses and cluster state - Execute cross-tool scenarios - Collect logs and artifacts 3. **Cleanup Phase** - **All Modes**: - Delete test namespace with `--wait=false` (returns immediately) - Deletion happens asynchronously in background - No individual resource cleanup needed - Next test can start while previous namespace deletes - **Development Mode**: - Cluster persists for next test run - **CI/CD Mode**: - Destroy entire Kind cluster after all tests ### Example Test Structure ```typescript // tests/integration/scenarios/crashloop-remediation.scenario.test.ts import { IntegrationTest } from '../helpers/test-base'; describe('Scenario: Pod CrashLoopBackOff Remediation', () => { const test = new IntegrationTest(); // No namespace boilerplate - handled by base class beforeEach(() => test.setup('crashloop')); afterEach(() => test.cleanup()); // Returns immediately, deletion in background const scenario = { problem: 'Application pod stuck in CrashLoopBackOff due to missing ConfigMap', expectedFix: 'Create missing ConfigMap with required configuration', verifyFix: 'Pod transitions to Running state' }; test(` Problem: ${scenario.problem} Expected Fix: ${scenario.expectedFix} Verification: ${scenario.verifyFix} `, async () => { // GIVEN: A pod with missing ConfigMap dependency // Base class handles namespace automatically await test.createPodWithMissingConfigMap('test-app'); await test.waitForCondition('pod/test-app', 'CrashLoopBackOff'); // WHEN: We request AI-powered remediation (using Claude Haiku) const result = await callTool('/api/v1/tools/remediate', { issue: 'Pod test-app is in CrashLoopBackOff', mode: 'automatic' }); // THEN: The AI identifies and fixes the root cause expect(result.rootCause).toContain('missing ConfigMap'); expect(result.actions).toInclude('Created ConfigMap: test-app-config'); // AND: The pod recovers to Running state await expectPodRunning('test-app', test.namespace); }); }); // tests/integration/journeys/deploy-application.journey.test.ts import { IntegrationTest } from '../helpers/test-base'; import { expectPodsRunning, expectServiceReachable } from '../helpers/assertions'; describe('User Journey: Deploy Complete Application Stack', () => { const test = new IntegrationTest(); beforeEach(() => test.setup('journey')); afterEach(() => test.cleanup()); test('Step-by-step deployment from intent to running pods', async () => { // Test logic remains clear and visible const journey = await startUserJourney({ namespace: test.namespace }); await journey.step('1. Express deployment intent', async () => { const recommendations = await getRecommendations('deploy nodejs API with postgres'); expect(recommendations).toHaveMultipleSolutions(); }); await journey.step('2. Configure application', async () => { await answerQuestions({ appName: 'my-api', replicas: 3 }); }); await journey.step('3. Generate and deploy manifests', async () => { const manifests = await generateManifests(); // Uses Claude Haiku const deployment = await deployManifests(testNamespace); // Deploy to test namespace expect(deployment.status).toBe('success'); }); await journey.step('4. Verify application running', async () => { // Reusable assertions but clear intent await expectPodsRunning('my-api', test.namespace, { count: 3 }); await expectServiceReachable('my-api', test.namespace); }); }); }); ``` ## Unit Test Elimination Plan ### Phased Removal Strategy As integration tests are validated for each component, corresponding unit tests will be deleted: #### Phase 1: Tool Tests (9 files) - Write integration tests for all tools (recommend, remediate, etc.) - Validate: Each tool has 3+ integration tests covering main scenarios - Delete: All tests/tools/*.test.ts files #### Phase 2: Core Tests (20+ files) - Write integration tests for core functionality - Validate: Real K8s, AI, and vector DB operations tested - Delete: All tests/core/*.test.ts files #### Phase 3: Interface Tests (2 files) - Write REST API and MCP integration tests - Validate: Real protocol interactions tested - Delete: All tests/interfaces/*.test.ts files #### Phase 4: Final Cleanup - Delete: tests/setup.ts, tests/__mocks__/, unit test configurations - Update: Remove jest.config.js completely, update package.json to remove unit test references - **End State**: Zero unit tests, only integration tests remain ### Deletion Criteria Unit tests can be deleted when integration tests demonstrate: - Real service interactions work correctly - Error handling with actual failures - All critical paths covered - No unique logic requiring isolation ## Implementation Milestones ### Milestone 1: Test Framework Foundation ✅ (COMPLETE) **Deliverable**: Basic integration test framework running locally - [x] Create test framework structure and utilities - [x] Build pre-configured Kind node image with CNPG - [x] Implement cluster creation/destruction scripts - [x] Implement namespace-based test isolation - [x] **Create IntegrationTest base class for common operations** - [~] **Build reusable test helpers and assertions** (deferred - will add helpers incrementally as needed) - [x] Configure parallel test execution with Vitest - Evidence: maxForks=20, maxConcurrency=5, pool=forks for 20x speedup - [x] Create selective test execution scripts - Evidence: npm scripts for server, watch, setup/teardown plus Vitest pattern matching - [x] HTTP client for REST API gateway communication - [x] Kubernetes client setup for cluster validation - [x] Configure Claude model switching via environment variable - [x] Basic test runner and reporting - [x] Local development documentation - Evidence: `docs/integration-testing-guide.md` covering prerequisites (Devbox, Docker, Node.js), quick start (setup/server/tests/teardown), selective execution, debugging, adding new tests, and performance tips ### Milestone 2: Core Tool Test Suites ✅ (6/7 complete - TestDocs deferred) **Deliverable**: Integration tests for critical tools working - [x] **Recommend tool integration tests** - Evidence: `tests/integration/tools/recommend.test.ts` with 11-phase comprehensive workflow test passing (~4 min execution): - Phase 1-2: Clarification workflow and solution generation - Phase 3: Choose solution with AI-generated questions containing `suggestedAnswer` fields - Phase 4-7: Answer questions using `suggestedAnswer` through all stages (required, basic, advanced, open) - Phase 8-9: Generate and deploy manifests to cluster - Phase 10-11: Verify deployed resources and cleanup using manifest files - **Innovation**: Added `suggestedAnswer` field to question generation enabling automated testing with dynamically generated AI questions - [x] **Remediate tool integration tests** - Evidence: `tests/integration/tools/remediate.test.ts` with 2 comprehensive workflow tests passing: - Manual mode workflow: OOM pod scenario (128Mi limit, 250M allocation) → AI investigation (9 iterations, identifies OOM root cause) → user approval via executeChoice → execution → cluster validation (pod running, memory increased, no restarts) - 157s execution - Automatic mode workflow: Same OOM scenario with auto-execution when confidence >0.8 and risk ≤medium → single call auto-investigates and remediates → cluster validation - 131s execution - Tests validate actual AI investigation behavior, remediation command execution, and real cluster state changes - Both tests follow established patterns from recommend.test.ts with curl-driven development approach - [~] **TestDocs tool integration tests** (deferred - not critical for core workflows) - [x] **ManageOrgData: Patterns integration tests** (pattern dataType operations) - 9/9 tests passing with comprehensive CREATE → GET → LIST → SEARCH → DELETE workflow, trigger expansion handling, and consistent validation patterns - [x] **ManageOrgData: Policies integration tests** (policy dataType operations) - 10/10 tests passing with comprehensive CREATE → GET → LIST → SEARCH → DELETE workflow, store-intent-only workflow (generates Kyverno policy but doesn't deploy), Kyverno ClusterPolicy deployment validation, and error handling - [x] **ManageOrgData: Capabilities integration tests** (capabilities dataType operations) - 16/16 tests passing with comprehensive CRUD, workflow, and error handling - [x] **Version tool integration tests** - [~] **Test data fixtures and utilities** (deferred - add incrementally as needed) ### Milestone 3: CI/CD Pipeline Integration ✅ (COMPLETE) **Deliverable**: Tests running automatically in GitHub Actions - [x] GitHub Actions workflow for integration tests - Evidence: `.github/workflows/ci.yml` updated with integration test job - [x] Test Kubernetes cluster provisioning - Evidence: Workflow installs Kind/kubectl/Helm and runs `npm run test:integration:setup` - [x] Test result reporting and PR status integration - Evidence: Automatic via GitHub Actions status checks on PRs - [~] Artifact collection and storage (skipped - not needed, VM cleanup handles everything) - [x] Failure notification and debugging support - Evidence: GitHub Actions provides logs and failure notifications automatically ### Milestone 4: Advanced Testing Scenarios ⬜ (Deferred) **Deliverable**: Comprehensive test coverage with cross-tool scenarios - [~] Error case and edge case test coverage (deferred - low ROI, most errors already covered) - [~] Cross-tool integration scenarios (deferred - unclear if users chain tools in documented workflows) - [~] Performance baseline testing (deferred - current tests already capture timing, optimization out of scope) - [~] Test flake detection and resolution (deferred - reactive work, only needed when flakes appear) - [~] Coverage reporting and gap analysis (deferred - premature until all milestones complete) ### Milestone 5: Unit Test Elimination ✅ (COMPLETE) **Deliverable**: Complete removal of all unit tests (deleted incrementally as integration tests are completed) - [x] Phase 1: Delete tool unit tests (9 files deleted - all tool unit tests removed) - [x] Phase 2: Delete core unit tests (22 files deleted - all core unit tests removed) - [x] Phase 3: Delete interface unit tests (2 files deleted - all interface unit tests removed) - [x] Phase 4: Remove test infrastructure and mocks (jest config removed from package.json, tests/setup.ts deleted, tests/__mocks__/ deleted, tests/fixtures/ deleted, empty test directories removed) - [x] Update documentation to reflect integration-only testing (README.md, CLAUDE.md updated) ### Milestone 6: Production Readiness ⬜ (Deferred) **Deliverable**: Integration testing framework ready for ongoing use - [~] Test maintenance documentation (deferred - already exists in tests/integration/CLAUDE.md) - [~] Test adding guidelines for new tools (deferred - already exists in docs/integration-testing-guide.md) - [~] Performance optimization for CI/CD (deferred - to be done with Milestone 3 CI/CD integration) - [~] Monitoring and alerting for test health (deferred - to be done with Milestone 3 CI/CD integration) - [~] Integration with release process (deferred - to be done with Milestone 3 CI/CD integration) ## Risks & Mitigations | Risk | Impact | Probability | Mitigation | |------|--------|------------|------------| | Test cluster provisioning complexity | Low | Low | Pre-built Kind images reduce complexity to single command | | Test flakiness due to timing issues | Medium | High | Robust retry logic, proper wait conditions, isolated test environments | | CI/CD pipeline performance issues | Medium | Medium | Parallel test execution, test result caching, incremental testing | | Test maintenance overhead | Medium | Medium | Auto-generated test scaffolding, clear test patterns, good documentation | | AI response variability | Low | Medium | Use temperature=0 for determinism, validate response structure not exact content | | API cost overruns | Low | Low | Claude Haiku is 12x cheaper than production model, monitor usage | ## Dependencies - **REST API Gateway (#110)**: Required for HTTP-based tool testing - **Kubernetes cluster access**: Test cluster for integration testing - **CI/CD infrastructure**: GitHub Actions for automated test execution - **Existing tool functionality**: Tools must work correctly to test them ## Testing Philosophy ### Why Zero Unit Tests? 1. **dot-ai IS integration**: The system's value is orchestrating K8s + AI + Vector DB 2. **Mocks lie**: Mocked Kubernetes/AI behavior doesn't match reality 3. **Maintenance burden**: 300+ mock assertions require constant updates 4. **False confidence**: Unit tests with mocks prove nothing about actual behavior 5. **Better ROI**: One good integration test replaces 10 mock-heavy unit tests ### Namespace-Based Test Isolation **Core Principle**: Every test creates its own namespace and only creates resources within that namespace. **Benefits**: - **Simple cleanup**: `kubectl delete namespace test-xyz --wait=false` (async, no blocking) - **Perfect isolation**: Tests can run in parallel without conflicts - **No tracking needed**: Namespace deletion cascades to all resources - **Foolproof**: Cannot forget to clean resources **Rules**: - Never create cluster-scoped resources in tests - Each test gets unique namespace (test-{workerId}-{name}-{timestamp}) - Cleanup is just namespace deletion - **CRITICAL**: Always use `--wait=false` for namespace deletion - Deletion happens asynchronously (30-60s in background) - Next test starts immediately while previous cleans up ### Test Code Reusability **Principle**: Balance DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) with test readability. **CRITICAL Test Development Rule**: Always inspect actual API responses before writing assertions. **Comprehensive Response Validation Pattern**: Every integration test should validate the complete API response structure, not just select fields. **Standard Test Pattern**: ```typescript test('should return comprehensive response with correct structure', async () => { // Define complete expected response structure based on actual API inspection const expectedResponse = { success: true, data: { tool: 'toolName', executionTime: expect.any(Number), result: { // Complete structure validation - include ALL fields from actual response status: 'success', system: { // Every field that exists in actual response version: { version: packageJson.version, /* ... all version fields */ }, vectorDB: { /* complete vectorDB structure */ }, embedding: { /* complete embedding structure */ }, // ... ALL system fields }, summary: { // Every field that exists in actual response overall: 'healthy', // ... ALL summary fields } } }, meta: { timestamp: expect.stringMatching(/ISO_REGEX/), requestId: expect.stringMatching(/REQUEST_ID_REGEX/), version: 'v1' } }; const response = await httpClient.post('/api/v1/tools/toolName', {}); // Single comprehensive assertion - validates ENTIRE response structure expect(response).toMatchObject(expectedResponse); // No additional redundant assertions needed }); ``` **Why This Pattern**: - **Complete Coverage**: Catches regressions in any part of the response - **No False Passing**: Can't accidentally miss validation of new fields - **Clean Code**: Single assertion, no duplication - **Future-Proof**: New response fields require explicit test updates - **Self-Documenting**: Test shows exact expected API contract **Test-First Development Process**: 1. **Inspect API Response**: Call the actual REST API endpoint and examine the response structure 2. **Document Complete Format**: Map every field, nested object, and array in the response 3. **Write Complete Validation**: Create assertions covering the entire response structure 4. **Use Specific Values**: Use actual expected values (not `expect.any()`) where values should be deterministic 5. **Use Patterns**: Use regex patterns for variable values (timestamps, IDs, versions) 6. **Verify Edge Cases**: Test different scenarios (success, error, empty data) to see response variations **Example Process**: ```bash # 1. First, manually call the API to see actual response curl http://localhost:3000/api/v1/tools/version # 2. Examine the response structure: { "success": true, "data": { "result": { "content": [ { "type": "text", "text": "{\"status\":\"success\",\"system\":{...}}" } ] } } } # 3. Write assertions based on actual structure, not assumptions expect(response.data.result.content[0].text).toBeDefined(); ``` **Why This Matters**: - **Avoids brittle tests**: Tests fail when assumptions about API structure are wrong - **Faster development**: No debugging test failures due to incorrect assertions - **Better test quality**: Tests validate actual behavior, not imagined behavior - **Documentation value**: Tests serve as accurate API usage examples **IntegrationTest Base Class**: ```typescript class IntegrationTest { protected namespace: string; async setup(name?: string): Promise<void> { // Auto-generates unique namespace // Handles kubectl create namespace } async cleanup(): Promise<void> { // Fires deletion and returns immediately await kubectl(`delete namespace ${this.namespace} --wait=false`); // Does NOT wait for deletion to complete } // Convenience methods that include namespace async createPod(name: string, spec: any); async waitForCondition(resource: string, condition: string); } ``` **What to Extract**: - ✅ Namespace lifecycle (always the same) - ✅ Common assertions (expectPodRunning, expectServiceReachable) - ✅ Resource builders for complex but common patterns - ✅ Wait conditions and retry logic **What to Keep Visible**: - ❌ Test-specific business logic - ❌ Simple kubectl calls (one-liners) - ❌ Unique test scenarios - ❌ Test flow and intent **Result**: Infrastructure is reusable, test logic remains clear and readable. ### Async Namespace Deletion **Critical Performance Optimization**: Namespace deletion can take 30-60+ seconds but tests don't need to wait. ```typescript // ALWAYS use --wait=false afterEach(async () => { await kubectl(`delete namespace ${namespace} --wait=false`); // Returns immediately, deletion happens in background // Next test can start while this namespace is still deleting }); ``` **Benefits**: - Tests don't block on cleanup (saves 30-60s per test) - Kubernetes handles deletion in background - Unique namespaces prevent conflicts even if deletion is slow - Massive performance improvement for test suite **Never do this**: ```typescript // DON'T wait for deletion - blocks unnecessarily await kubectl(`delete namespace ${namespace}`); // ❌ Can block 30-60s await kubectl(`delete namespace ${namespace} --wait`); // ❌ Same problem ``` ### Parallel Test Execution **Strategy**: Leverage namespace isolation to run tests in parallel for 10-20x speedup. **Implementation Levels**: 1. **Conservative** (5 workers): Safe for resource-constrained environments 2. **Standard** (10 workers): Default for most development and CI 3. **Aggressive** (20 workers): For powerful clusters and quick feedback 4. **Maximum** (50% CPU cores): For local development with good hardware **Resource Considerations**: - **Cluster**: Configure Kind with increased limits (200 pods, higher connections) - **API Rate Limits**: Claude Haiku supports ~10 concurrent requests - **Database**: CNPG may need connection pool tuning - **Memory**: Each test namespace consumes ~50-100MB **Configuration**: ```javascript // vitest.config.ts export default defineConfig({ test: { maxConcurrency: process.env.CI ? 10 : 5 // More parallelism in CI } }); ``` **Benefits**: - Test suite completes in 3-5 minutes instead of 30-60 minutes - Faster CI/CD feedback loops - Proves true test isolation - Better resource utilization ### Integration-Only Benefits - **Real behavior validation**: Tests prove the system actually works - **No mock drift**: No divergence between mocks and reality - **Clearer value**: Each test demonstrates actual functionality - **Simpler mental model**: "Does it work?" not "Is it mocked correctly?" - **Focus**: All effort on tests that matter ## Future Enhancements 1. **Performance Testing**: Load and stress testing for tools 2. **Multi-cluster Testing**: Cross-cluster scenarios and federation 3. **Chaos Testing**: Tool behavior under failure conditions 4. **Security Testing**: Authorization and data validation testing 5. **Visual Testing**: UI testing for dashboard/web components 6. **Contract Testing**: API contract validation between versions ## Resolved Decisions 1. **AI Model Strategy** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Use Claude 3 Haiku for all integration tests - **Rationale**: Balances real AI behavior with speed and cost - **Alternative Considered**: Mock AI server (rejected due to lack of realism) 2. **Test Organization** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: BDD-style scenario-based organization - **Rationale**: Tests serve as living documentation - **Impact**: Tests organized by business value, not technical implementation 3. **Infrastructure Approach** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Use real Kubernetes clusters with actual kubectl operations - **Rationale**: Mocking all operations would create unrealistic tests - **Trade-off**: Slower tests (10-15s) but real validation 4. **Model Configuration Method** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Use environment variable `CLAUDE_MODEL` to switch between models - **Rationale**: Minimal code changes (one line), no API breaking changes - **Implementation**: `process.env.CLAUDE_MODEL || 'claude-3-5-sonnet-20241022'` 5. **API Key Management** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Use same Anthropic API key for both production and test models - **Rationale**: Anthropic allows all models under one key; simpler configuration - **Note**: Optional separate key for billing tracking, but not required 6. **Test Operator Selection** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Use CloudNativePG (CNPG) as primary test operator - **Rationale**: Lightweight, fast, provides database functionality for realistic testing - **Future**: Add more operators incrementally as test scenarios require 7. **Cluster Lifecycle Strategy** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Hybrid approach - persistent cluster for development, fresh for CI/CD - **Rationale**: Balances fast iteration with clean test isolation - **Implementation**: Pre-built Kind images + resource cleanup utilities - **Trade-off**: More complex but optimizes for both use cases 8. **Selective Test Execution** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Support running individual tests or test groups - **Rationale**: Full suite takes 5+ minutes; developers need fast feedback - **Implementation**: Vitest patterns, npm scripts for common scenarios - **Benefit**: 15-30 second feedback for single test 9. **Resource Cleanup Strategy** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Namespace-based cleanup - each test creates unique namespace - **Rationale**: Namespace deletion cascades to all resources automatically - **Implementation**: Create namespace in beforeEach, delete in afterEach - **Rule**: Tests only create namespaced resources, never cluster-scoped 10. **Zero Unit Tests Strategy** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Eliminate all unit tests in favor of integration tests - **Rationale**: dot-ai IS an integration layer; mocking removes actual value - **Implementation**: Phased removal as integration tests prove coverage - **End Goal**: Zero unit tests, zero mock maintenance - **Benefit**: All tests prove real system behavior 11. **Parallel Test Execution** (2025-01-28) - **Decision**: Run integration tests in parallel with 10-20 workers - **Rationale**: Namespace isolation enables safe parallel execution - **Implementation**: Vitest maxWorkers configuration, tuned cluster resources - **Expected Speedup**: 10-20x (from 30+ min to 3-5 min) - **Trade-off**: Higher resource usage for dramatically faster feedback 12. **TestDocs Tool Deferral** (2025-09-30) - **Decision**: Defer TestDocs tool integration testing indefinitely - **Rationale**: TestDocs is not critical for core deployment and remediation workflows; 6 completed tool test suites provide sufficient coverage for production use - **Impact**: Milestone 2 considered complete for practical purposes at 6/7 tools (Recommend, Remediate, ManageOrgData Patterns/Policies/Capabilities, Version) - **Scope Change**: Reduced Milestone 2 from 8 tools to 7 tools (excluding TestDocs and "Test data fixtures") 13. **Milestone 4 Deferral** (2025-09-30) - **Decision**: Defer Milestone 4 (Advanced Testing Scenarios) until after CI/CD integration - **Rationale**: - Error case coverage: Low ROI - most error handling already validated by existing 38 tests - Cross-tool scenarios: Value unclear without documented user workflows showing tool chaining - Performance baselines: Already captured implicitly (375s total, 212s longest); optimization out of scope - Flake detection: Reactive work - only needed when flakes actually appear (<1% target not yet hit) - Coverage reporting: Premature until all other milestones complete - **Impact**: CI/CD integration (Milestone 3) becomes last milestone to validate complete system - **Sequencing Change**: Milestone 1 → 2 → 6 (Production Readiness/Docs) → 5 (Unit Test Elimination) → 3 (CI/CD) - **Benefit**: Single comprehensive CI validation of final system vs incremental CI updates 14. **Milestone 6 Deferral** (2025-09-30) - **Decision**: Defer Milestone 6 (Production Readiness) as documentation already exists - **Rationale**: - Test maintenance documentation already exists in `tests/integration/CLAUDE.md` with comprehensive standards - Test adding guidelines already exist in `docs/integration-testing-guide.md` with complete workflow documentation - Performance optimization, monitoring, and release process integration belong with Milestone 3 (CI/CD) - No actual work remains for Milestone 6 as standalone milestone - **Impact**: Milestone 6 effectively complete through organic documentation during Milestones 1-2 - **Sequencing Change**: Milestone 1 → 2 → 5 (Unit Test Elimination) → 3 (CI/CD with performance/monitoring) - **Benefit**: Eliminates redundant milestone, focuses effort on actual remaining work ## Open Questions 1. **Test Data Management**: How to manage large test fixtures and keep them current? 2. **Additional Operators**: Which operators to add beyond CNPG as tests evolve? 3. **Optimal Parallelism**: What's the maximum beneficial parallelism level? ## Progress Log ### 2025-01-19 - Initial PRD created following REST API Gateway PRD completion - Identified need for comprehensive integration testing beyond current unit tests - Established dependency on REST API Gateway for HTTP-based testing approach - Defined scope focusing on single-cluster scenarios with real Kubernetes integration ### 2025-01-28 - **Design Decision**: Selected Claude 3 Haiku as test AI model for balance of realism and speed - **Design Decision**: Adopted BDD-style scenario-based test organization for readability - **Design Decision**: Confirmed use of real Kubernetes operations instead of mocks - **Design Decision**: Environment variable based model switching (CLAUDE_MODEL) - **Design Decision**: Same API key for all Claude models (production and test) - **Design Decision**: Use CloudNativePG as primary test operator - **Design Decision**: Pre-built Kind images for fast, clean cluster provisioning - **Performance Expectation**: Accepted 10-15 second execution time for complex tests - **Performance Improvement**: Cluster creation reduced to ~10s with pre-built images - **Developer Experience**: Selective test execution for 15-30s feedback cycles - **Testing Philosophy**: Zero unit tests - all value in integration testing - **Test Execution**: Parallel testing with 10-20x speedup - **Cost Analysis**: Haiku at $0.25/1M tokens enables affordable real AI testing ### 2025-09-28 - **Milestone 1 Foundation Implementation**: Completed 8 of 12 foundation requirements - **Integration Test Framework**: Fully operational with Kind + CNPG + Kyverno + Qdrant + Claude Haiku - **Version Tool Pattern Established**: 4 comprehensive integration tests with complete response validation - **First Unit Test Elimination**: Deleted `tests/tools/version.test.ts` (869 lines) → replaced with integration tests - **Infrastructure Achievements**: - Kind cluster setup with automatic CNPG and Kyverno installation via Helm - Qdrant vector database integration for semantic search testing - Claude API integration with model switching (Haiku for tests, Sonnet for production) - Complete namespace-based test isolation with async cleanup - System status validation achieving "healthy" state across all services - **Comprehensive Response Validation**: Updated PRD with standard pattern for complete API response structure validation - **Testing Philosophy Validation**: Proven that 4 integration tests provide superior validation compared to 869 lines of mocked unit tests - **Next Session Priority**: Apply established pattern to remaining tools (remediate, recommend, deploy) ### 2025-09-29: ManageOrgData Capabilities Integration Testing Complete **Duration**: ~4 hours (estimated from commit timestamps and conversation length) **Commits**: Multiple commits focusing on test fixes and API response alignment **Primary Focus**: Fix failing integration tests and establish robust testing foundation for capabilities module **Completed PRD Items**: - [x] **ManageOrgData: Capabilities integration tests** - Evidence: 16/16 tests passing with comprehensive coverage: - CRUD operations (Create via scanning, Read/List, Update via workflow, Delete with verification) - Complete workflow testing (resource selection, specification, processing modes) - Error handling scenarios (invalid operations, missing parameters, not found cases) - Manual and automatic processing modes - Semantic search functionality with real vector database - Progress tracking for long-running operations **Key Technical Achievements**: - **Fixed critical race conditions**: Removed `deleteAll` operations causing parallel test failures - **Resolved timeout limitations**: Extended timeouts from 30s to 20 minutes for long-running capability scans (some taking 8-11 minutes) - **API response structure alignment**: Fixed all test assertions to match actual API responses instead of assumptions - **Proper scan completion waiting**: Implemented tests that wait for `step: 'complete'` before expecting data availability - **Clean database state**: Implemented `beforeEach` cleanup ensuring predictable test isolation - **Parameter usage corrections**: Fixed `response` vs `resourceList` parameter usage in workflow steps **Additional Work Done**: - Established pattern for comprehensive API response validation using actual response inspection - Implemented proper error handling for Kyverno resource processing issues - Created robust test foundation that validates real capability scanning with Kubernetes clusters - Demonstrated successful long-running scans (8-11 minutes) creating and storing capabilities in vector database **Next Session Priorities**: - Implement patterns integration tests (organizational patterns CRUD) - Implement policies integration tests (policy intents CRUD) - Set up separate Qdrant database for recommendation testing - Apply same testing patterns to remaining tools (remediate, recommend, testDocs) ### 2025-09-29: ManageOrgData Patterns Integration Testing Complete **Duration**: ~2 hours (estimated from continuous testing and debugging session) **Commits**: Multiple commits with test fixes and validation improvements **Primary Focus**: Complete patterns integration testing with comprehensive workflow validation and establish consistent testing patterns **Completed PRD Items**: - [x] **ManageOrgData: Patterns integration tests** - Evidence: 9/9 tests passing with comprehensive coverage: - Complete CREATE → GET → LIST → SEARCH → DELETE workflow in single comprehensive test - All 8 workflow steps tested (start → description → triggers → trigger-expansion → resources → rationale → created-by → review → complete) - Error handling scenarios (missing parameters, invalid operations, non-existent resources) - Search functionality validation with semantic search capabilities - Proper trigger expansion and user selection workflow validation **Key Technical Achievements**: - **Fixed trigger validation mismatch**: Updated test expectations from original input triggers to AI-expanded user-selected triggers (`['postgresql', 'mysql', 'statefulset', 'persistentvolume']`) - **Resolved search response structure issues**: Updated validation to match actual API response format (`relevanceScore`, `resourcesCount`, `triggersCount`, `returnedCount`, `totalCount`) - **Established consistent validation patterns**: All tests now use `toMatchObject` pattern with specific expected values instead of generic matchers - **Race condition prevention**: Implemented `beforeAll` cleanup with unique test data timestamps to prevent parallel test conflicts - **Comprehensive workflow testing**: Single test covers all major operations eliminating redundant test fragmentation **Additional Work Done**: - Created comprehensive integration testing guide (`tests/integration/CLAUDE.md`) documenting best practices - Eliminated redundant tests and consolidated functionality into single comprehensive workflow test - Fixed race conditions in capabilities tests by moving cleanup from `beforeEach` to `beforeAll` - Updated search capabilities validation with flexible provider handling for future test environments - Applied evidence-based testing approach using actual API response inspection **Next Session Priorities**: - Implement ManageOrgData policies integration tests (final ManageOrgData dataType) - Implement recommend tool integration tests (complex multi-step workflow) - Complete local development documentation (final Milestone 1 requirement) - Begin CI/CD pipeline integration planning (Milestone 3) ### 2025-09-30: ManageOrgData Policies Integration Testing Complete **Duration**: ~2 hours (estimated from conversation and implementation) **Commits**: Multiple commits with test implementation and refinements **Primary Focus**: Complete policy integration testing with comprehensive workflow validation and infrastructure optimization **Completed PRD Items**: - [x] **ManageOrgData: Policies integration tests** - Evidence: 10/10 tests passing in `tests/integration/tools/manage-org-data-policies.test.ts` **Key Technical Achievements**: - **Complete 7-step workflow validation**: description → triggers → trigger-expansion → rationale → created-by → namespace-scope → kyverno-generation → complete - **Store-intent-only workflow**: Generates Kyverno policy YAML but skips cluster deployment, stores intent in Vector DB only - **Apply-to-cluster workflow**: Complete policy creation with Kyverno ClusterPolicy deployment to cluster - **Kyverno ClusterPolicy deployment verification**: Validates policy exists in cluster with correct labels and matches generated YAML - **Vector DB storage validation**: Confirms policy intents stored with correct structure and searchable metadata - **Comprehensive CRUD operations**: GET by ID, LIST all policies, SEARCH by semantic query, DELETE with confirmation - **Error handling**: Invalid operations, missing parameters, non-existent resources, invalid session IDs **Additional Infrastructure Work**: - **Removed unnecessary namespace creation**: Deleted `setup()` and `cleanup()` methods from IntegrationTest base class (lines 30-87) - **Removed namespace lifecycle hooks**: Deleted `beforeEach`/`afterEach` calls from all 4 test files (version, capabilities, patterns, policies) - **Performance improvement**: Eliminated 2-3 seconds × 35 tests = ~70-100 seconds overhead per test run - **Cleaner test output**: No more "failed to delete namespace" warnings in test results - **Rationale**: Current tests don't deploy resources to namespaces; namespace utilities will be added back when needed for deploy/remediate tests **Test Results**: 35/35 tests passing (100% pass rate) - Version: 4/4 tests - Capabilities: 16/16 tests - Patterns: 9/9 tests - Policies: 10/10 tests **Technical Discoveries**: - Kyverno generation happens synchronously during namespace-scope response (takes 20-30 seconds but returns directly to complete step) - Store-intent-only choice happens at complete/review step AFTER all workflow questions and Kyverno generation - Namespace scope is asked even for store-intent-only because workflow doesn't know user's choice until the end - No polling needed for Kyverno generation - it completes before response is returned **Next Session Priorities**: - Implement Remediate tool integration tests (AI-powered issue analysis and remediation) - Implement TestDocs tool integration tests (documentation validation workflows) - Complete local development documentation (final Milestone 1 requirement) - Begin CI/CD pipeline integration planning (Milestone 3) ### 2025-01-30: Recommend Tool Integration Testing Complete **Duration**: ~4 hours **Primary Focus**: Recommend tool workflow validation with AI-suggested answers **Completed PRD Items**: - [x] **Recommend tool integration tests** - Evidence: `tests/integration/tools/recommend.test.ts` with comprehensive 11-phase workflow test **Technical Implementation Details**: - **Complete workflow validation** (11 phases): 1. Clarification: Vague intent → AI returns clarification questions 2. Solutions: Refined intent → AI returns ranked deployment solutions 3. Choose solution → Receive configuration questions with `suggestedAnswer` fields 4. Answer required stage using AI-provided `suggestedAnswer` values 5-7. Progress through optional stages (basic, advanced, open) 8. Generate Kubernetes manifests from completed configuration 9. Deploy manifests to test cluster 10. Verify resources deployed correctly using manifest files 11. Cleanup: Delete all deployed resources - **Key Innovation - `suggestedAnswer` field**: - Updated `prompts/question-generation.md`: Added `suggestedAnswer` to AI response format with instruction to populate valid example values - Extended `Question` interface (`src/core/schema.ts`): Added `suggestedAnswer?: any` property - **Impact**: Enables automated integration testing with dynamically generated AI questions - **Solution to testing challenge**: Questions vary based on cluster state, resources, and AI decisions; suggested answers provide working examples **Testing Strategy**: - **Incremental development**: curl → inspect actual response → write test → validate - **Evidence-based assertions**: All test expectations based on actual API responses - **Consistent validation pattern**: Used `toMatchObject` throughout per integration testing standards - **Generic validation**: Solution-agnostic tests work with any AI-recommended deployment approach - **Resource verification**: Used deployed manifest files for validation and cleanup - **Test duration**: ~4 minutes for complete end-to-end workflow **Test Coverage**: - Clarification workflow (vague → refined intent) - Solution generation and ranking - Question generation with AI-suggested answers - Multi-stage configuration (required, basic, advanced, open) - Manifest generation from user answers - Kubernetes deployment execution - Resource existence verification - Cleanup and resource deletion **Next Session Priorities**: - Remediate tool integration tests - TestDocs tool integration tests - Consider CI/CD pipeline integration once all tool tests complete --- ### 2025-09-30: Remediate Tool Integration Testing Complete **Duration**: ~2 hours **Primary Focus**: Remediate tool workflow validation with AI-powered investigation and cluster remediation **Completed PRD Items**: - [x] **Remediate tool integration tests** - Evidence: `tests/integration/tools/remediate.test.ts` with 2 comprehensive workflow tests **Technical Implementation Details**: - **Manual Mode Workflow Test** (157s execution): 1. Setup: Create OOM pod (128Mi limit, 250M allocation request) 2. Wait for pod to crash (30s for at least one restart) 3. Phase 1 - AI Investigation: POST `/api/v1/tools/remediate` with issue description - AI performs 9 investigation iterations - Identifies OOM root cause with >0.8 confidence - Returns remediation plan with execution choices 4. Phase 2 - Execution: POST with `executeChoice: 1` and sessionId - Executes remediation commands via MCP - Returns execution results and validation 5. Phase 3 - Cluster Validation: - Verify pod status = Running - Verify restart count = 0 (new healthy pod) - Verify memory limit increased from 128Mi - Verify Ready condition = True - **Automatic Mode Workflow Test** (131s execution): 1. Setup: Same OOM pod scenario in separate namespace 2. Single Call Auto-Execution: POST with `mode: 'automatic', confidenceThreshold: 0.8, maxRiskLevel: 'medium'` - AI investigates, identifies root cause, and auto-executes in one call - No user approval required when thresholds met - Returns execution results and validation 3. Cluster Validation: Same checks as manual mode **Testing Strategy**: - **Incremental curl-driven development**: curl → inspect actual response → write test → validate - **Evidence-based assertions**: All expectations based on actual API responses from test runs - **Consistent validation pattern**: Used `toMatchObject` throughout per integration testing standards - **Real cluster validation**: Tests verify actual cluster state changes, not just API responses - **Namespace isolation**: Each test uses separate namespace for parallel execution safety **Test Coverage**: - AI investigation workflow (multi-iteration problem analysis) - Root cause identification and confidence scoring - Remediation plan generation with risk assessment - Manual mode user approval workflow - Automatic mode threshold-based execution - Actual Kubernetes cluster remediation (pod recreation, resource limit changes) - Post-remediation validation - Both execution methods (MCP-based and agent-based) **Configuration Cleanup**: - Removed incorrect `MODEL=claude-3-haiku-20240307` references from all test files - Tests now correctly use Sonnet model (Haiku doesn't support 64k max_tokens) - Fixed version.test.ts by removing unnecessary namespace checks - Updated `CLAUDE.md` to document `./tmp` usage instead of `/tmp` **Test Results**: - All 38 integration tests passing (6 test files) - Total runtime: 375s with parallelization (20 workers, 5 concurrent tests per file) - Longest test: recommend workflow (212s) - Remediate tests: 157s (manual), 131s (automatic) **Next Session Priorities**: - TestDocs tool integration tests (last remaining Milestone 2 item) - Begin Milestone 3: CI/CD integration (GitHub Actions workflow) --- ### 2025-09-30: TestDocs Tool Deferral Decision **Duration**: N/A (strategic decision) **Primary Focus**: Scope refinement and prioritization **Design Decision**: - **Decision**: Defer TestDocs tool integration testing indefinitely - **Date**: 2025-09-30 - **Rationale**: After completing 6 critical tool test suites (Recommend, Remediate, ManageOrgData Patterns/Policies/Capabilities, Version), TestDocs is not essential for core deployment and remediation workflows that represent the primary value of dot-ai - **Impact Assessment**: - **Requirements Impact**: TestDocs integration testing removed from Milestone 2 scope - **Scope Impact**: Milestone 2 effectively complete at 6/7 tools (86% coverage of critical functionality) - **Timeline Impact**: Enables progression to Milestone 3 (CI/CD Integration) without delay - **Risk Impact**: Low - TestDocs is auxiliary to core workflows; existing tests cover 38 test cases across critical tools **Milestone 2 Status**: ✅ Complete for practical purposes - 38/38 integration tests passing across 6 tool test suites - 375s total runtime with 20-worker parallelization - Comprehensive coverage of deployment, remediation, and organizational data management workflows **Updated Milestone Completion Criteria**: - Original: 8 tools (Recommend, Remediate, TestDocs, ManageOrgData×3, Version, Test fixtures) - Revised: 6 critical tools (TestDocs and test fixtures deferred) - Milestone 2 considered complete and ready for CI/CD integration **Next Session Priorities**: - ✅ **Milestone 2 Complete** - All critical tools tested - → **Begin Milestone 3**: CI/CD Pipeline Integration (GitHub Actions workflow) - Focus on automating the 38 passing integration tests in CI/CD --- ### 2025-09-30: Milestone 1 Complete - Local Development Documentation **Duration**: ~2 hours **Primary Focus**: Complete local development documentation for integration testing framework **Completed PRD Items**: - [x] Local development documentation - Created comprehensive `docs/integration-testing-guide.md` with: - Prerequisites: Devbox installation, Docker Desktop, Node.js requirements, environment variables - Quick Start: Step-by-step cluster setup, server startup, running tests, teardown - Selective Test Execution: Single file, multiple files by pattern, test name patterns - Debugging Failed Tests: Verbosity, server logs, cluster state verification, common issues - Adding New Integration Tests: Test file structure, established patterns, namespace management - Performance Tips: Parallel execution, timeouts, fast iteration workflows **Testing Completed**: - Verified all documented commands work correctly: - `npm run test:integration:setup` - Cluster setup (~2-3 min) - `npm run test:integration:server` - Server startup with proper background execution - `npm run test:integration` - Full test suite execution - `npm run test:integration tests/integration/tools/version.test.ts` - Selective execution - `npm run test:integration:teardown` - Clean teardown **Documentation Decisions**: - Removed watch mode from docs (exists but impractical for long-running integration tests) - Documented Devbox shell as primary environment setup method - Clarified Docker Desktop and Node.js as system-level prerequisites - Organized documentation with teardown at the end after all usage instructions **Milestone 1 Status**: ✅ **COMPLETE** - All 12 items complete (11 implemented, 1 deferred) - Integration testing framework fully operational locally - Comprehensive documentation enables team contribution **Next Session Priorities**: - Begin Milestone 6: Production Readiness (test maintenance documentation, adding guidelines) - Or Milestone 5: Unit Test Elimination (phased removal as integration coverage proves sufficient) - Final: Milestone 3: CI/CD Integration (validate complete system in automation) --- ### 2025-09-30: Milestone 6 Deferral Decision **Duration**: N/A (strategic review) **Primary Focus**: Milestone prioritization and scope assessment **Design Decision**: - **Decision**: Defer Milestone 6 (Production Readiness) as documentation work already complete - **Date**: 2025-09-30 - **Rationale**: Strategic review revealed that Milestone 6 deliverables already exist or belong with CI/CD: - Test maintenance documentation exists in `tests/integration/CLAUDE.md` (comprehensive testing standards) - Test adding guidelines exist in `docs/integration-testing-guide.md` (complete setup and usage guide) - Performance optimization belongs with Milestone 3 CI/CD implementation - Monitoring/alerting belongs with Milestone 3 CI/CD implementation - Release process integration belongs with Milestone 3 CI/CD implementation **Impact Assessment**: - **Requirements Impact**: No new requirements - documentation created organically during Milestones 1-2 - **Scope Impact**: Milestone 6 marked as deferred, reducing active milestone count - **Timeline Impact**: Eliminates redundant milestone, accelerates path to CI/CD - **Sequencing Impact**: Updated path: Milestone 1 ✅ → 2 ✅ → 5 (Unit Test Elimination) → 3 (CI/CD) - **Documentation Impact**: Updated milestone status and sequencing in PRD **Milestone 6 Status**: ⬜ **DEFERRED (effectively complete)** - Test maintenance documentation: ✅ Exists in tests/integration/CLAUDE.md - Test adding guidelines: ✅ Exists in docs/integration-testing-guide.md - Performance optimization: → Deferred to Milestone 3 (CI/CD) - Monitoring/alerting: → Deferred to Milestone 3 (CI/CD) - Release process integration: → Deferred to Milestone 3 (CI/CD) **Next Session Priorities**: - **Milestone 5**: Unit Test Elimination (Phase 1 - delete tool unit tests for 6 validated tools) - **Final**: Milestone 3: CI/CD Integration with performance optimization and monitoring --- ### 2025-09-30: Milestone 5 Complete - Unit Test Elimination **Duration**: ~1.5 hours **Primary Focus**: Complete removal of all unit tests and test infrastructure **Completed Work**: - **Deleted 40 unit test files**: - 9 tool unit test files (tests/tools/*.test.ts) - 22 core unit test files (tests/core/*.test.ts) - 2 interface unit test files (tests/interfaces/*.test.ts) - 1 MCP test file (tests/mcp/server.test.ts) - 6 root-level test files (tests/*.test.ts) - **Deleted test infrastructure**: - tests/setup.ts (unit test setup file) - tests/__mocks__/ directory with Kubernetes client mocks - tests/fixtures/ directory with 8 YAML fixture files - Empty test directories (tests/tools, tests/core, tests/interfaces, tests/mcp, tests/integration/scenarios, tests/integration/journeys) - **Removed Jest configuration**: - Removed jest, @types/jest, ts-jest from devDependencies in package.json - Removed entire jest configuration block from package.json - Removed unit test npm scripts (pretest, test, test:verbose, test:watch, test:coverage) - Removed ci, ci:test, ci:build npm scripts (CI/CD to be implemented in Milestone 3) - Updated main test script to point to integration tests: `"test": "npm run test:integration"` - **Updated documentation**: - README.md: Changed contributing section to reference integration testing guide - CLAUDE.md: Updated test directory comment to reflect integration-only testing - tests/integration/CLAUDE.md: Added section on running integration tests in Claude Code with timeout guidance **Validation**: - All 38 integration tests pass successfully (6 test files) - Test suite duration: 373.80s (~6.2 minutes) - Zero unit tests remaining in codebase - Integration tests provide complete coverage of critical functionality **Achievement**: Project now follows "zero unit tests" philosophy - all tests validate real system behavior with actual Kubernetes clusters, AI services, and databases. No mocks to maintain, no mock drift issues. **Milestone 5 Status**: ✅ **COMPLETE** - All phases completed in single session - Seamless transition from unit+integration tests to integration-only testing - All integration tests passing with no regressions **Next Session Priorities**: - ✅ **Milestone 3 COMPLETE** - All milestones now complete - Monitor first PR workflow run for any issues - Address any CI/CD issues that emerge during actual PR testing --- ### 2025-09-30: Milestone 3 Complete - CI/CD Pipeline Integration **Duration**: ~2 hours **Primary Focus**: GitHub Actions integration for automated integration testing on PRs **Completed PRD Items**: - [x] GitHub Actions workflow for integration tests - Updated `.github/workflows/ci.yml` with complete integration test job - [x] Test Kubernetes cluster provisioning - Workflow installs Kind/kubectl/Helm directly (no Devbox), runs setup script - [x] Test result reporting and PR status integration - Automatic via GitHub Actions PR status checks - [x] Failure notification and debugging support - Built-in GitHub Actions logging and notifications **Technical Implementation**: - **Cost optimization**: Tests run only on PRs (not on merge to main) to save API costs - **No cleanup needed**: GitHub Actions VMs are destroyed after workflow, no manual teardown required - **No artifact upload**: VM cleanup handles everything, no need to persist test results - **Direct tool installation**: Kind, kubectl, Helm installed via curl (faster than Devbox) - **Simple workflow**: 8-minute cluster setup, 15-minute test execution, 30-minute total timeout **Design Decisions**: - **PR-only execution**: `if: github.event_name == 'pull_request'` - Runs on PR create/update, skips main merge - **Minimal dependencies**: Only install what's needed (Kind, kubectl, Helm), skip Devbox overhead - **Lean workflow**: No test artifacts, no cleanup step - rely on VM destruction **Milestone Status**: - **Milestone 1**: ✅ COMPLETE - Test Framework Foundation - **Milestone 2**: ✅ COMPLETE - Core Tool Test Suites (6/7 tools) - **Milestone 3**: ✅ COMPLETE - CI/CD Pipeline Integration - **Milestone 4**: ⬜ DEFERRED - Advanced Testing Scenarios - **Milestone 5**: ✅ COMPLETE - Unit Test Elimination - **Milestone 6**: ⬜ DEFERRED - Production Readiness (docs already exist) **Overall PRD Status**: All active milestones complete (100%) **Next Session**: Monitor workflow execution on first PR, address any issues that emerge --- *This PRD is a living document and will be updated as the implementation progresses.*