/night-market-validation-and-qa

name: night-market-validation-and-qa
description: 'Enforce evidence bar, coverage gates, and regression guards. Use when adding tests or claiming done. Do not use to run suites; use night-market-operations.'

Validation and QA: what counts as evidence here

This skill defines the evidence bar for claiming work complete, the coverage and quality thresholds that gate merges, the golden regression tests that guard settled battles, and the procedure for adding tests. The one-line thesis: a green check proves spec-satisfaction, not correctness, so every completion claim needs cited evidence and every test needs proof it can fail.

The evidence bar

Never claim "should work". Run the thing, capture the output, cite it. The house discipline comes from `Skill(imbue:proof-of-work)`:

1. Number every piece of evidence: `[E1]`, `[E2]`, each with the exact command and its captured output. 2. Map each acceptance criterion to evidence with a verdict: `Criterion: [E2] -> PASS` or `-> FAIL`. 3. Give the overall claim one of three statuses: `COMPLETE` (all criteria passed), `PARTIAL` (list blockers), `BLOCKED` (explain why). A blocked task reported as blocked with evidence is a successful report. A guessed "done" is not. 4. The final response must not contain "should work", "looks right", or any other unverified confidence phrase.

Verifier integrity: never let the generator judge itself

A passing verifier can mislead two ways (from the prover-verifier research, codified in commit `29081fda`, module `plugins/imbue/skills/proof-of-work/modules/verifier-integrity.md`):

| Failure mode | What it looks like | |--------------|--------------------| | Wrong spec | The check confirms the code matches the spec, not that the spec matches intent | | Hollow check | `assert True`, a mock returning the expected value, a stubbed service: all green, all worthless |

Rules that follow:

• The agent that wrote the code must not be the sole judge of whether

the code works. Use an independent check: a fresh subagent, the real test suite, a human, or an end-to-end run the generator cannot influence.

• Validate the spec separately from the code. A machine-checked pass

against a wrong spec is confident, green, and wrong.

• When reviewing a test, ask what change to the code would make it

fail. If nothing would, it is not a test.

Iron Law TDD (Constitution rule 3)

CONSTITUTION.md rule 3: no implementation without a failing test first. Scope:

• Applies to every code change in plugin Python sources

(`plugins/*/src/`, `plugins/*/scripts/`, `plugins/*/hooks/`).

• Skill files, agent files, and prose docs are exempt. Their analogue

is a structural validation test: every new skill needs a `test_skill_<name>.py` proving the structure.

A structural validation test asserts observable content in the skill file: required sections exist, the referenced modules exist on disk, tables and examples the skill promises are present. Model on `plugins/imbue/tests/unit/skills/test_proof_of_work.py`, which checks SKILL.md sections, module files, and enforcement tables. The test must fail if someone deletes the section it guards (see the tautological-test trap below).

Thresholds

| Gate | Value | Where defined | Enforced by | |------|-------|---------------|-------------| | Root coverage | `fail_under = 85` | root `pyproject.toml` `[tool.coverage.report]` | root pytest runs | | Per-plugin coverage | `coverage_threshold` in `[tool.nightmarket]`, 90 for most plugins, 85 for gauntlet | `plugins/<p>/pyproject.toml` | `scripts/run-plugin-tests.sh` passes `--cov-fail-under` only when the key is set and > 0 | | Mutation testing | weekly Sunday 00:00 UTC cron mutates only sanctum (the matrix falls back to sanctum when the dispatch input is empty); abstract/imbue/attune run only via manual dispatch with `plugin=all` or a named plugin | `.github/workflows/mutation-testing.yml` | mutmut: exit 0 = no survivors, exit 2 = survivors (allowed), anything else = crash | | Critical issues | `max_critical_issues: 3`, `enforce_blocking: true` | `.claude/quality_gates.json` | quality-gate tooling | | File size | < 20KB and < 5000 tokens per file | `.claude/quality_gates.json` | advisory (`block_on_violation: false`) | | Function length | <= 60 lines, complexity < 12, nesting <= 5, debt ratio < 0.3 | `.claude/quality_gates.json` | advisory, except security dimension which blocks |

Notes:

• The `run-plugin-tests.sh` awk parser reads `coverage_threshold` from

`[tool.nightmarket]`, never from `addopts`. Use `scripts/fix_coverage_threshold.py` to migrate a plugin still using the old location.

• The script itself sets no minimum floor for `coverage_threshold`. If

the key is absent, no `--cov-fail-under` flag is passed at all, so a plugin without the key has no coverage gate in the runner.

• imbue's own `addopts` force `--cov=scripts` plus term and HTML

coverage reports on every run, including single-file runs.

The tautological-test trap

PR review here repeatedly catches tests that assert nothing. Evidence in history: `a94240e2` (12 tests of constants tightened to behavioral coverage), `f1cbbcf1` (strengthened tautological assertions), `30e58586` (validation-floor regression test), `42f7ce84` (round-trip test replacing a structure-only check). The pattern: a test that restates the code, mocks the unit under test, or asserts a constant equals itself.

The counter-discipline is the revert test, executed by `sanctum:validate-pr`:

1. Take the fix the PR claims to make. 2. Edit the fixed line back to its broken state (working tree must be clean first, or the step is skipped as unsafe). 3. Run the test that supposedly guards the fix. 4. The test must FAIL against the reverted code. If it stays green, the test is a dead assertion, not a guard. 5. Restore the fix.

When writing a new test, apply the same standard preemptively: write the test so it would catch the bug's return, then confirm it fails be