test: add unit tests for planners module#4766
test: add unit tests for planners module#4766cchinchilla-dev wants to merge 2 commits intogoogle:mainfrom
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello, 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 significantly improves the robustness of the Highlights
🧠 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
Activity
Using Gemini Code AssistThe 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
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 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
|
adk-bot
added
the
core
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a comprehensive suite of unit tests for the planners module, significantly improving code coverage and ensuring the correctness of the abstract BasePlanner and its concrete implementations, BuiltInPlanner and PlanReActPlanner. The tests are well-structured, covering various scenarios including interface contracts, configuration handling, and complex response processing logic. My review found the tests to be of high quality. I have one suggestion to enhance the assertions in one of the tests for PlanReActPlanner to make it even more robust.
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2 participants
Link to Issue or Description of Change
Testing Plan
Unit Tests:
Added 41 tests across three new files:
test_base_planner.py(4 tests): Abstract interface enforcement, concrete subclass instantiation, method contracts.test_built_in_planner.py(7 tests):apply_thinking_config()(set, preserve, overwrite with log), return values ofbuild_planning_instructionandprocess_planning_response.test_plan_re_act_planner.py(30 tests):_split_by_last_pattern(),_mark_as_thought(),_handle_non_function_call_parts()(parametrized for all tags + final answer),process_planning_response()(empty/None parts, function call filtering, text-after-FC dropping),build_planning_instruction().$ pytest tests/unittests/planners/ -v 41 passed $ pytest tests/unittests/planners/ --cov=src/google/adk/planners --cov-report=term-missing base_planner.py 88% (2 uncovered pass in abstract methods) built_in_planner.py 100% plan_re_act_planner.py 100% TOTAL 98%Manual End-to-End (E2E) Tests:
Not applicable — pure unit tests with no runtime side effects.
Checklist
Additional context
Happy to adjust the tests based on maintainer feedback.