Skip to content

Always use the failures-only reporter for testing #160

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 6, 2025
Merged

Conversation

natebosch
Copy link
Member

The default reporter has verbose output which is not useful but eats up
a lot of input tokens once it's in the history. Always run tests with
--reporter=failures-only to reduce the output size. This output format
still includes a count of passing tests.

The default reporter has verbose output which is not useful but eats up
a lot of input tokens once it's in the history. Always run tests with
`--reporter=failures-only` to reduce the output size. This output format
still includes a count of passing tests.
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 5, 2025

PR Health

Changelog Entry ✔️
Package Changed Files

Changes to files need to be accounted for in their respective changelogs.

@natebosch
Copy link
Member Author

I have not had much success so far in prodding clients into following specific instructions for using any of the tools. I also can't consistently get clients to run the actual CLI interfaces following specific instructions provided by the MCP server. It's all pretty easy to handle with user specified config, but difficult to make a responsibility of the MCP tooling.

I think we'll have better luck getting the clients to interact with the MCP tools in the ways we want than the direct CLI so we should try to make each of them as useful for model input as possible. An easy win is to reduce the output size for tests, so land that first.

There's no audience for this, and the version doesn't matter for
packages not published to pub... Satisfy the health check.
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
# 0.1.1-wip

* Instruct clients to prefer MCP tools over running tools in the shell.
* Reduce output size of `run_tests` tool to save on input tokens.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same comment as other PR, I would move this into the section below as we will do more rolls before the last beta release for 3.8.

* Reduce output size of `run_tests` tool to save on input tokens.

# 0.1.0 (Dart SDK 3.8.0)
# 0.1.0-wip (Dart SDK 3.8.0)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The -wip is a bit odd, I do get that it is more clear that new entries should be added to it. But, it is already "released" in the sense that it is rolled into the SDK. I don't really want to push a last minute merge into the SDK just before the final beta cut just to change the version. So, that is why I marked it as not -wip, even though it is wip 🤣 .

Anyways, I don't feel strongly here, we could just remove the -wip at some point later after the beta cut happens, and just accept that in the SDK the version will always be wip.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We could do several version bumps, versioning it each time we want to merge into the SDK, but that will add extra process to doing those SDK merges (an extra PR each time) and for little value.

We could also just remove the version number here entirely.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As discussed separately - I dropped the package level version number and made the header of the changelog just the SDK version reference with a WIP marker to prioritize easy edits with an (optional) step to remove it for the stable SDK publish.

Title the changelog based on the intended SDK version. Leave a WIP
marker for clarity on future edits which may be cleaned up before
published but is not a risk if retained.
@natebosch natebosch merged commit fa1c2be into main Jun 6, 2025
15 checks passed
@natebosch natebosch deleted the failures-only branch June 6, 2025 20:10
copybara-service bot pushed a commit to dart-lang/sdk that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2025
Revisions updated by `dart tools/rev_sdk_deps.dart`.

ai (https://github.com/dart-lang/ai/compare/1d9d60c..f2b48c6):
  f2b48c6  2025-06-09  Nate Bosch  Retain compatibility with 3.7 SDKs (dart-lang/ai#163)
  52adf08  2025-06-06  Jacob MacDonald  add homepage, repository, and documentation links to the pub result (dart-lang/ai#155)
  fa1c2be  2025-06-06  Nate Bosch  Always use the failures-only reporter for testing (dart-lang/ai#160)
  66a152f  2025-06-06  Nate Bosch  Instruct clients to prefer MCP (dart-lang/ai#161)
  55ad850  2025-06-05  Jacob MacDonald  Add a retroactive changelog (dart-lang/ai#157)
  b08a610  2025-06-05  Jacob MacDonald  Update instructions, add cursor install link (dart-lang/ai#159)

web (https://github.com/dart-lang/web/compare/f1becf0..de6b3e4):
  de6b3e4  2025-06-06  Srujan Gaddam  Add missing copyrights and delete empty files (dart-lang/web#371)
  74a33ba  2025-06-06  Kevin Moore  Add in a missing library directive, missing new line (dart-lang/web#370)
  4d24eb5  2025-06-06  nikeokoronkwo  [web_generator] Setting up `web_generator` for Dart JS Interop Gen (dart-lang/web#368)

webdev (https://github.com/dart-lang/webdev/compare/55941b0..661dafd):
  661dafd4  2025-06-08  Srujan Gaddam  Defer execution of main until resume for hot restart with DDC library bundle format (dart-lang/webdev#2623)
  01a3b9d7  2025-06-06  Nicholas Shahan  Remove skip from chrome proxy service test

Change-Id: If3d4326d0bacf47a4d95520dbd0aac5fb58de439
Reviewed-on: https://dart-review.googlesource.com/c/sdk/+/433363
Commit-Queue: Devon Carew <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Konstantin Shcheglov <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants