docs(contributing): complete the 'run what CI runs' list (#262)

The list omitted security_guards.py and the exact unittest invocation;
the one recent contributor CI failure fitting #262's description (#238)
failed on precisely the omitted script. Reported by @jakob1379.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Mads Lorentzen
2026-07-31 11:32:56 +02:00
co-authored by Claude Fable 5
parent 9bf9a65212
commit f220d92495
+1 -1
View File
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ Reviews here are empirical. Bug reports are reproduced on master before the fix
- State the failing case and how to reproduce it.
- **Reproduce on the real path, not a constructed input.** A test that fails on master and passes on the fix is necessary but not sufficient: the failing input has to be one the workflow actually produces, not one the test hand-builds. Show the failure through the path the code really runs - the documented CLI invocation, real portal output, an actual data file - not a synthetic value fed straight to the function. A fix whose only demonstration is an input the real code path never receives gets declined even though its test is green.
- Put CLI tests in `.agents/skills/<name>/cli/tests/` (bun test, network-free where possible); Python tool tests in `tests/`.
- Run what CI runs: `python3 tools/lint_skills.py`, `python3 tools/check_framework_version.py`, `bun run typecheck` in touched CLIs, and the relevant test suites.
- Run what CI runs: `python3 tools/lint_skills.py`, `python3 tools/check_framework_version.py`, `python3 tools/security_guards.py`, `python3 -m unittest discover -s tests`, and in touched CLIs `bun run typecheck` + `bun test`.
**Credit norm:** a change that incorporates your actual code gets a `Co-authored-by` trailer; a change written independently from your observation or report gets a named mention in the commit message and PR. Both happen unprompted.