Marketplace coverage-analyzer
Advanced coverage analysis with actionable insights. Use to identify coverage gaps, suggest specific tests, track coverage trends, and highlight critical uncovered code. Essential for reaching 80%+ coverage target.
git clone https://github.com/aiskillstore/marketplace
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/aiskillstore/marketplace "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/atyantik/coverage-analyzer" ~/.claude/skills/aiskillstore-marketplace-coverage-analyzer && rm -rf "$T"
skills/atyantik/coverage-analyzer/SKILL.mdCoverage Analyzer
⚠️ MANDATORY: Read Project Documentation First
BEFORE starting coverage analysis, you MUST read and understand the following project documentation:
Core Project Documentation
- README.md - Project overview, features, and getting started
- AI_DOCS/project-context.md - Tech stack, architecture, development workflow
- AI_DOCS/code-conventions.md - Code style, formatting, best practices
- AI_DOCS/tdd-workflow.md - TDD process, testing standards, coverage requirements
Session Context (if available)
- .ai-context/ACTIVE_TASKS.md - Current tasks and priorities
- .ai-context/CONVENTIONS.md - Project-specific conventions
- .ai-context/RECENT_DECISIONS.md - Recent architectural decisions
- .ai-context/LAST_SESSION_SUMMARY.md - Previous session summary
Additional AI Documentation
- AI_DOCS/ai-tools.md - Session management workflow
- AI_DOCS/ai-skills.md - Other specialized skills/agents available
Why This Matters
- Coverage Requirements: Understand project-specific coverage thresholds (80%+ minimum)
- Testing Patterns: Follow established testing conventions when suggesting tests
- Code Context: Understand module structure and dependencies
- Recent Changes: Be aware of recent test additions or coverage improvements
After reading these files, proceed with your coverage analysis task below.
Overview
Provide advanced test coverage analysis with actionable insights for improving coverage to meet the 80%+ requirement.
When to Use
- After running
to understand gapsmake coverage - Before completing a feature (ensure adequate coverage)
- When coverage is below 80% target
- To identify critical uncovered code paths
- For tracking coverage trends over time
What This Skill Provides
✅ Detailed Coverage Analysis
- Current coverage percentage
- Uncovered lines by file
- Missing branches
✅ Actionable Recommendations
- Specific tests to write
- Code locations needing tests
- Priority of coverage gaps
✅ Coverage Gaps Identification
- Critical uncovered paths (error handling)
- Edge cases not tested
- Integration points missing tests
✅ Test Suggestions
- Concrete test code recommendations
- Parametrized test suggestions
- Fixture recommendations
✅ Trend Tracking
- Coverage history over time
- Improvement/regression detection
- Progress toward 80%+ goal
Usage Examples
Analyze Current Coverage
# Generate detailed coverage analysis analyze test coverage
Output: Comprehensive report with gaps and recommendations
Find Critical Gaps
# Focus on critical uncovered code show critical coverage gaps
Output: High-priority uncovered code (error handling, security, edge cases)
Get Test Suggestions
# Get specific test recommendations suggest tests for uncovered code in src/python_modern_template/validators.py
Output: Concrete test cases to add
Track Coverage Trends
# See coverage over time show coverage trend for last month
Output: Graph showing coverage changes
Step-by-Step Analysis Process
Step 1: Run Coverage
# Generate coverage report make coverage
This creates:
- Terminal output with overall percentage
- HTML report in
htmlcov/
data file.coverage
Step 2: Parse Coverage Data
Read coverage data from multiple sources:
# Read terminal output for overall stats # Read htmlcov/index.html for detailed breakdown # Parse .coverage file for line-by-line data
Step 3: Identify Uncovered Lines
For each source file:
- List uncovered line numbers
- Group by type (functions, error handling, edge cases)
- Prioritize by criticality
Step 4: Analyze Context
For each uncovered section:
- Read surrounding code
- Understand what the code does
- Identify why it's not covered
- Determine appropriate test type
Step 5: Generate Recommendations
Create specific test suggestions:
- Test function name
- Test scenario
- Example test code
- Parameters to test
Step 6: Calculate Priority
CRITICAL - Must cover immediately:
- Error handling paths
- Security-related code
- Data validation
- Authorization checks
HIGH - Should cover soon:
- Edge cases
- Boundary conditions
- Integration points
- Public API functions
MEDIUM - Good to cover:
- Internal helper functions
- Logging statements
- Configuration parsing
LOW - Optional:
- Debug code
- Development-only paths
- Deprecated functions
Analysis Report Format
# Test Coverage Analysis ## Executive Summary **Current Coverage:** 75.3% **Target:** 80%+ **Gap:** 4.7% (23 uncovered lines) **Status:** ⚠️ Below target **Breakdown:** - src/python_modern_template/: 73.2% (18 uncovered lines) - tests/: 100% (fully covered) --- ## Critical Gaps (MUST FIX) ### 1. Error Handling in validators.py ⚠️ CRITICAL **File:** src/python_modern_template/validators.py **Lines:** 45-52 (8 lines) **Function:** `validate_email()` **Uncovered Code:** ```python 45: except ValueError as e: 46: logger.error(f"Email validation failed: {e}") 47: raise ValidationError( 48: "Invalid email format" 49: ) from e 50: except Exception: 51: logger.critical("Unexpected validation error") 52: return False
Why Critical: Error handling paths are not tested, could hide bugs
Recommended Test:
def test_validate_email_value_error_handling() -> None: """Test email validation handles ValueError correctly.""" # Arrange invalid_email = "not-an-email" # Act & Assert with pytest.raises(ValidationError) as exc_info: validate_email(invalid_email) assert "Invalid email format" in str(exc_info.value) assert exc_info.value.__cause__ is not None def test_validate_email_unexpected_error_handling() -> None: """Test email validation handles unexpected errors.""" # Arrange # Mock to raise unexpected exception with patch('validators.EMAIL_REGEX.match', side_effect=RuntimeError("Unexpected")): # Act result = validate_email("test@example.com") # Assert assert result is False
Impact: Covers 8 lines, adds 3.5% coverage
2. Edge Case in parser.py ⚠️ CRITICAL
File: src/python_modern_template/parser.py Lines: 67-70 (4 lines) Function:
parse_config()
Uncovered Code:
67: if not config_data: 68: logger.warning("Empty configuration provided") 69: return DEFAULT_CONFIG 70: # Unreachable line removed
Why Critical: Edge case handling not tested
Recommended Test:
def test_parse_config_empty_data() -> None: """Test parser handles empty configuration.""" # Arrange empty_config = {} # Act result = parse_config(empty_config) # Assert assert result == DEFAULT_CONFIG def test_parse_config_none_data() -> None: """Test parser handles None configuration.""" # Arrange # Act result = parse_config(None) # Assert assert result == DEFAULT_CONFIG
Impact: Covers 4 lines, adds 1.7% coverage
High Priority Gaps
3. Integration Point in api_client.py
File: src/python_modern_template/api_client.py Lines: 112-118 (7 lines) Function:
retry_with_backoff()
Uncovered Code:
112: @retry(max_attempts=3, backoff=2.0) 113: def retry_with_backoff(self, operation: Callable) -> Any: 114: """Retry operation with exponential backoff.""" 115: try: 116: return operation() 117: except ConnectionError: 118: logger.warning("Connection failed, retrying...")
Why High: Integration logic with retry mechanism
Recommended Test:
@pytest.mark.parametrize("attempt,should_succeed", [ (1, True), # Succeeds first try (2, True), # Succeeds second try (3, True), # Succeeds third try (4, False), # Fails after max attempts ]) def test_retry_with_backoff(attempt: int, should_succeed: bool) -> None: """Test retry mechanism with various scenarios.""" # Arrange client = APIClient() call_count = 0 def flaky_operation(): nonlocal call_count call_count += 1 if call_count < attempt: raise ConnectionError("Connection failed") return "success" # Act & Assert if should_succeed: result = client.retry_with_backoff(flaky_operation) assert result == "success" assert call_count == attempt else: with pytest.raises(ConnectionError): client.retry_with_backoff(flaky_operation)
Impact: Covers 7 lines, adds 3.0% coverage
Coverage By Module
| Module | Coverage | Uncovered Lines | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|
| validators.py | 65% | 12 | CRITICAL |
| parser.py | 80% | 4 | HIGH |
| api_client.py | 75% | 7 | HIGH |
| utils.py | 95% | 1 | LOW |
Total: 75.3% (23 uncovered lines)
Quick Win Recommendations
These tests would quickly boost coverage:
-
Add error handling tests (validators.py)
- +3.5% coverage
- 10 minutes to write
-
Add edge case tests (parser.py)
- +1.7% coverage
- 5 minutes to write
-
Add integration tests (api_client.py)
- +3.0% coverage
- 15 minutes to write
Total Impact: +8.2% coverage (reaching 83.5%) Total Time: ~30 minutes
Coverage Trend
Week 1: 70% ███████░░░ Week 2: 72% ███████▓░░ Week 3: 75% ████████░░ Week 4: 75% ████████░░ ← Current (stalled) Target: 80% ████████▓░
Trend: +5% over 3 weeks, then stalled Recommendation: Focus on quick wins above to break through 80%
Detailed File Analysis
src/python_modern_template/validators.py (65% coverage)
Covered:
- Basic email validation (happy path)
- URL validation (happy path)
- Phone number validation
Not Covered:
- Error handling (lines 45-52)
- Edge cases (empty strings, None)
- Invalid format handling
Missing Test Types:
- Parametrized tests for invalid inputs
- Exception handling tests
- Edge case tests
src/python_modern_template/parser.py (80% coverage)
Covered:
- Standard config parsing
- Type conversion
- Default value handling
Not Covered:
- Empty config handling (lines 67-70)
Missing Test Types:
- Edge case tests (empty, None)
src/python_modern_template/api_client.py (75% coverage)
Covered:
- Basic API calls
- Authentication
- Response parsing
Not Covered:
- Retry logic (lines 112-118)
- Connection error handling
- Backoff mechanism
Missing Test Types:
- Integration tests with retries
- Failure scenario tests
Next Steps
Immediate Actions (30 minutes)
-
Add error handling tests to validators.py
# Edit tests/test_validators.py # Add test_validate_email_value_error_handling() # Add test_validate_email_unexpected_error_handling() -
Add edge case tests to parser.py
# Edit tests/test_parser.py # Add test_parse_config_empty_data() # Add test_parse_config_none_data() -
Add integration tests to api_client.py
# Edit tests/test_api_client.py # Add test_retry_with_backoff() -
Run coverage again
make coverage
Expected Result: 83.5% coverage (exceeds 80% target!)
Verify Implementation
# Run tests to ensure they fail (TDD) make test # Verify uncovered code is exercised # Fix any test issues # Re-run coverage make coverage # Should see 80%+ coverage
Additional Recommendations
Use Parametrized Tests
For multiple similar test cases:
@pytest.mark.parametrize("email,valid", [ ("test@example.com", True), ("invalid-email", False), ("", False), (None, False), ("test@", False), ("@example.com", False), ]) def test_validate_email_parametrized(email: str | None, valid: bool) -> None: """Test email validation with various inputs.""" if valid: assert validate_email(email) is True else: assert validate_email(email) is False
Use Fixtures for Common Setup
@pytest.fixture def sample_config(): """Provide sample configuration for tests.""" return { "api_url": "https://api.example.com", "timeout": 30, "retries": 3, } def test_parse_config_with_defaults(sample_config): """Test config parsing with defaults.""" result = parse_config(sample_config) assert result["timeout"] == 30
Focus on Critical Paths
Priority order:
- Error handling (catch exceptions)
- Edge cases (empty, None, invalid)
- Security checks (validation, authorization)
- Integration points (API calls, database)
- Business logic
- Utility functions
Coverage Best Practices
- Write tests FIRST (TDD) - Coverage comes naturally
- Test behavior, not implementation - Focus on what, not how
- Use real code over mocks - Only mock external dependencies
- Aim for 100% of new code - Don't lower the bar
- Track trends - Ensure coverage doesn't regress
- Review uncovered code regularly - Don't let gaps accumulate
Integration with Quality Tools
With make check
# Coverage is part of quality gates make check # Must pass 80%+ coverage requirement
With TDD Reviewer
# TDD reviewer checks coverage compliance [tdd-reviewer] # Includes coverage verification
With Coverage Command
# Generate HTML report make coverage # View in browser open htmlcov/index.html
Remember
"Coverage percentage is a measure, not a goal." "Aim for meaningful tests, not just high numbers."
Good coverage means:
- ✅ Critical paths tested
- ✅ Error handling verified
- ✅ Edge cases covered
- ✅ Integration points tested
Bad coverage means:
- ❌ Tests just to hit lines
- ❌ Meaningless assertions
- ❌ Over-mocking everything
- ❌ Ignoring critical gaps
Focus on quality coverage, not just quantity!
## Advanced Features ### Historical Tracking Store coverage data over time: ```bash # Save current coverage echo "$(date +%Y-%m-%d),$(coverage report | grep TOTAL | awk '{print $4}')" >> .coverage_history # View trend cat .coverage_history
Per-Module Breakdown
Analyze each module separately:
# Get coverage for specific module coverage report --include="src/python_modern_template/validators.py"
Branch Coverage
Not just line coverage, but branch coverage:
# Enable branch coverage in pyproject.toml [tool.pytest.ini_options] branch = true # Shows uncovered branches (if/else not both tested)
Diff Coverage
Focus on changed lines only:
# Install diff-cover pip install diff-cover # Check coverage of git diff diff-cover htmlcov/coverage.xml --compare-branch=main
Remember
Coverage analysis is a tool for improvement, not a report card. Use it to:
- Find gaps in testing
- Prioritize test writing
- Track progress
- Ensure quality
But always remember: 100% coverage ≠ bug-free code. Write meaningful tests!