LCORE-303: updated docstrings

[tisnik]

Description

LCORE-303: updated docstrings

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 #LCORE-303

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Improved and expanded docstrings for several test step definitions, providing clearer explanations of behavior, input expectations, and effects.
  • Updated descriptions to accurately reflect request methods and parameter usage in API testing steps.
  • Enhanced clarity in describing response validation and fragment checking in LLM response tests.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The updates consist solely of enhanced docstrings for several test step definitions in the common_http.py and llm_query_response.py files. These improvements provide more detailed explanations of function behaviors, input requirements, and effects, without altering any code logic, function signatures, or exported entities.

Changes

File(s)	Change Summary
tests/e2e/features/steps/common_http.py	Expanded and clarified docstrings for all step definitions to detail behavior, inputs, and context.
tests/e2e/features/steps/llm_query_response.py	Enhanced docstring for check_fragments_in_response to specify behavior and input requirements.

Poem

In the warren where tests hop and play,
Docstrings grew brighter, leading the way.
With clarity added, each step now is clear—
No bugs in the burrow, no reason to fear!
🐇✨

"Documentation blooms, and our code feels light,
For every test step now shines so bright!"

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate Docstrings

---

🪧 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 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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

tests/e2e/features/steps/common_http.py (1)

36-41: Docstring enhancement approved; consider HTTP verb semantics
The new wording is clear and correctly describes the data flow.
Minor: sending a JSON body with requests.get() is legal in requests but non-standard per HTTP semantics—some gateways drop the body. If compatibility is a concern, you may want to switch to POST or encode data in query params.

📜 Review details

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

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 36225c9 and 4a4e90c.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• tests/e2e/features/steps/common_http.py (6 hunks)
• tests/e2e/features/steps/llm_query_response.py (1 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (2)

• GitHub Check: build-pr
• GitHub Check: unit_tests (3.12)

🔇 Additional comments (6)

tests/e2e/features/steps/common_http.py (5)

61-66: Accurate and useful docstring
Good clarification about context.table and where the response is stored. No further action needed.

---

135-140: Schema-validation docstring LGTM
The expanded description precisely documents the assertions and data sources.

---

160-165: Docstring now fully explains failure modes
Clear enumeration of error conditions improves maintainability.

---

177-184: Parameter section adds clarity
Including the ignored-field parameter is helpful; content looks correct.

---

249-254: Verb correction and payload note appreciated
Docstring now matches the POST implementation and explains the payload source—good improvement.

tests/e2e/features/steps/llm_query_response.py (1)

39-47: Comprehensive docstring – well done
The expanded explanation of pre-checks and error handling makes the intent crystal clear.