Fix an e2e test case

[TamiTakamiya]

Description

An attempt to fix an error in e2e-test for #34.

This corresponds to the changes made with #136.

Type of change

• Refactor
• New feature
• Bug fix
• CVE fix
• Optimization
• Documentation Update
• Configuration Update
• Bump-up service version
• Bump-up dependent library
• Bump-up library or tool used for development (does not change the final image)
• CI configuration change
• Konflux configuration change
• Unit tests improvement
• Integration tests improvement
• End to end tests improvement

Related Tickets & Documents

• Related Issue Ignore JetBrains IDE folders. #34
• Closes #

Checklist before requesting a review

• I have performed a self-review of my code.
• PR has passed all pre-merge test jobs.
• If it is a core feature, I have added thorough tests.

Testing

• Please provide detailed steps to perform tests related to this code change.
• How were the fix/results from this change verified? Please provide relevant screenshots or results.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Updated readiness endpoint tests to include a new "providers" field and revised the expected response message.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The readiness endpoint test schema in the REST API feature file was updated to add a new "providers" field as a list of strings. The expected response body was also modified: the "providers" field is set to an empty list, and the "reason" field's value changed to "All providers are healthy".

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Change Summary
REST API Readiness Test Update tests/e2e/features/rest_api.feature	Added "providers" (list of strings) to readiness endpoint schema; updated expected response fields.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Poem

A bunny hopped through testy fields,
Where readiness now truth reveals.
Providers listed, none to show,
All are healthy—status glow!
With schemas neat and reasons clear,
The code review brings bunny cheer. 🐇✨

Note

⚡️ Unit Test Generation is now available in beta!

Learn more here, or try it out under "Finishing Touches" below.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch TamiTakamiya/e2e-test-fix

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Explain this complex logic.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
• @coderabbitai generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[manstis]

LGTM 👍

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

tests/e2e/features/rest_api.feature (1)

25-26: Hard-coding the human-readable reason risks fragile tests
"All providers are healthy" is likely to change whenever the health-check code adds new components. Consider relaxing the assertion to a substring/regex match (contains "healthy"), or validating the field is non-empty instead of exact equality to reduce maintenance churn.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4b94249 and 30e67c7.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• tests/e2e/features/rest_api.feature (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (1)

tests/e2e/features/rest_api.feature (1)

19-22: list[str] may not be parsed by the test runner – stick to the existing primitive-type pattern
All other schema keys use primitive markers ("bool", "str"). Introducing the composite marker "list[str]" assumes the step definition understands generics; many of our custom validators don’t. A safer, backward-compatible option is to keep the primitive keyword and assert the element type separately, e.g.:

-              "providers": "list[str]"
+              "providers": "list"

Then add a follow-up step such as:

And Each element of the "providers" field is of type "str"

Please confirm the step implementation supports the generic form or adjust as suggested; otherwise the e2e will blow up at runtime.