Missing Test Coverage For Invite API Routes (/invite, /invite/accept, /me/invites)

by ADMIN 83 views

Problem Description

The user invitation feature, which includes the ability to invite users by email with QR codes, accept invites, and view invite stats, was implemented in invite_routes.py. However, there was no corresponding test file (test_invite_routes.py) to verify the functionality of these endpoints. This presented a major gap in our test coverage because:

  • No automated test was ensuring the correctness of /invite behavior.
  • Edge cases like inviting yourself or inviting the same email multiple times were not being tested.
  • Any changes or refactoring to invite_routes.py could break the API silently without being caught during CI runs.

Why This Was a Problem

The invite feature involves several critical components: DB operations, QR code generation, MinIO object storage, and email delivery. If tests aren't written, developers may accidentally introduce regressions (e.g., allowing duplicate invites). Without route-level tests, we only test service logic (invite_service.py) in isolation — not real-world usage via HTTP requests.

Consequences of Not Having Test Coverage

Not having test coverage for the invite API routes can lead to several issues:

  • Silent failures: Changes or refactoring to invite_routes.py could break the API without being caught during CI runs.
  • Regression bugs: Developers may accidentally introduce regressions (e.g., allowing duplicate invites) without realizing it.
  • Incomplete testing: We only test service logic (invite_service.py) in isolation — not real-world usage via HTTP requests.

Solution: Add tests/test_routes/test_invite_routes.py

To address the missing test coverage, we created a new test file called test_invite_routes.py to directly test the FastAPI routes in invite_routes.py using httpx.AsyncClient. These are integration-style tests that simulate real API calls and verify responses.

How the Tests Were Written

The tests were written using the httpx library to simulate real API calls and verify responses. The tests cover the following scenarios:

  • Invite user: Test that a user can be invited successfully.
  • Accept invite: Test that an invite can be accepted successfully.
  • View invite stats: Test that invite stats can be viewed successfully.
  • Edge cases: Test edge cases like inviting yourself or inviting the same email multiple times.

Benefits of the Solution

The solution provides several benefits:

  • Improved test coverage: We now have test coverage for the invite API routes.
  • Prevented regression bugs: We prevented regression bugs in invite logic.
  • Caught input validation errors: We caught input validation errors, duplicate handling, and access control logic.
  • Enabled CI to validate full invite flow: We enabled CI to validate the full invite flow with real HTTP calls.

Final Outcome

The final outcome of the solution is:

  • Improved test coverage for invite-related features: We now have test coverage for the invite API routes.
  • Prevented regression bugs in invite logic: We prevented regression bugs in invite logic.
  • Caught input validation errors, duplicate handling, and access control logic: We caught input validation errors, duplicate handling, and access control logic.
  • Enabled CI to validate full invite flow with real calls: We enabled CI to validate the full invite flow with real HTTP calls.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the missing test coverage for the invite API routes was a major gap in our test coverage. By creating a new test file called test_invite_routes.py, we were able to directly test the FastAPI routes in invite_routes.py using httpx.AsyncClient. This solution provided several benefits, including improved test coverage, prevented regression bugs, caught input validation errors, and enabled CI to validate the full invite flow with real HTTP calls.

Q: What is the problem with missing test coverage for the invite API routes?

A: The problem with missing test coverage for the invite API routes is that it leaves the API vulnerable to silent failures, regression bugs, and incomplete testing. Without test coverage, developers may accidentally introduce regressions (e.g., allowing duplicate invites) without realizing it.

Q: What are the consequences of not having test coverage for the invite API routes?

A: The consequences of not having test coverage for the invite API routes include:

  • Silent failures: Changes or refactoring to invite_routes.py could break the API without being caught during CI runs.
  • Regression bugs: Developers may accidentally introduce regressions (e.g., allowing duplicate invites) without realizing it.
  • Incomplete testing: We only test service logic (invite_service.py) in isolation — not real-world usage via HTTP requests.

Q: How can we prevent regression bugs in invite logic?

A: We can prevent regression bugs in invite logic by writing tests that cover the following scenarios:

  • Invite user: Test that a user can be invited successfully.
  • Accept invite: Test that an invite can be accepted successfully.
  • View invite stats: Test that invite stats can be viewed successfully.
  • Edge cases: Test edge cases like inviting yourself or inviting the same email multiple times.

Q: What is the benefit of using integration-style tests for the invite API routes?

A: The benefit of using integration-style tests for the invite API routes is that they simulate real API calls and verify responses. This allows us to test the full invite flow with real HTTP calls, which is not possible with unit tests alone.

Q: How can we ensure that our tests are comprehensive and cover all possible scenarios?

A: We can ensure that our tests are comprehensive and cover all possible scenarios by:

  • Writing tests for edge cases: Test edge cases like inviting yourself or inviting the same email multiple times.
  • Using parameterized testing: Use parameterized testing to test different scenarios with different inputs.
  • Testing for errors: Test for errors and exceptions that may occur during the invite flow.

Q: What is the final outcome of the solution?

A: The final outcome of the solution is:

  • Improved test coverage for invite-related features: We now have test coverage for the invite API routes.
  • Prevented regression bugs in invite logic: We prevented regression bugs in invite logic.
  • Caught input validation errors, duplicate handling, and access control logic: We caught input validation errors, duplicate handling, and access control logic.
  • Enabled CI to validate full invite flow with real calls: We enabled CI to validate the full invite flow with real HTTP calls.

Q: What is the next step after implementing the solution?

A: The next step after implementing the solution is to:

  • Monitor test coverage: Monitor test coverage to ensure that it remains high and that new features are properly tested.
  • Continuously integrate and deploy: Continuously integrate and deploy changes to ensure that the API remains stable and functional.
  • Review and refine tests: Review and refine tests to ensure that they remain comprehensive and effective.