Add Missing Docstrings in Test Files

[sweep-ai-deprecated[bot]]

PR Feedback (click)

• [ ] 👍 Sweep Did Well
• [ ] 👎 Sweep Needs Improvement

I created this PR to address this rule:

"Ensure all new functions and classes have very clear, concise and up-to-date docstrings. Take gpt_engineer/ai.py as a good example."

Description

This PR addresses the issue of missing docstrings in two test files: "tests/caching_main.py" and "tests/test_install.py". Docstrings have been added to the "main" function in "tests/caching_main.py" and the "test_installed_main_execution" function in "tests/test_install.py". The docstrings provide a clear explanation of what each function does, its parameters, and its return values, improving code readability and maintainability.

Summary of Changes

• Added a docstring to the "main" function in "tests/caching_main.py". The docstring explains that this function is the entry point of the script and describes its behavior.
• Added a docstring to the "test_installed_main_execution" function in "tests/test_install.py". The docstring explains that this function is a test function that checks the execution of the main function in a specific environment and describes any setup or teardown steps.

The format and level of detail in the docstrings were guided by the docstring in the AI class constructor in the "gpt_engineer/core/ai.py" file.

[sweep-ai-deprecated[bot]]

Rollback Files For Sweep

• [ ] Rollback changes to tests/caching_main.py
• [ ] Rollback changes to tests/caching_main.py
• [ ] Rollback changes to tests/test_install.py
• [ ] Rollback changes to tests/test_install.py

[sweep-ai-deprecated[bot]]

Sandbox Executions

• [X] Running GitHub Actions for tests/caching_main.py ✓

Check tests/caching_main.py with contents:

Ran GitHub Actions for bf206a5a1abeaa2b274a799e96933869e02d4c0a:
• pre-commit: ✓
• Analyze (python): ✓
• test: ✓

• [X] Running GitHub Actions for tests/test_install.py ✓

Check tests/test_install.py with contents:

Ran GitHub Actions for 15e56a275309749fe69246eac79f6439d01e28d9:

[ErikBjare]

These kinds of auto-generated comments seem overly verbose to me, will inevitably become out of date (the AI can write them, but not keep them up-to-date), and imo make it harder (not easier) to read the code.

Not going to make a big fuss about it, just wanted to share my 2c.

Edit: Oops, didn't mean to trigger the bot :/

[sweep-ai-deprecated[bot]]

🚀 Wrote Changes

Done.

[sweep-ai-deprecated[bot]]

🚀 Wrote Changes

Done.

[ATheorell]

@ErikBjare I'm confused, what triggered the bot to make this PR? I have so far triggered the bot by tagging it in a git issue, but I don't see any related issue.

Agree on the problem with updating, unless some AI is constantly keeping track and updating. After some experimentation, my impression is that the current AI-bots are not managing doc-strings across the whole project very conveniently.

Additionally: Here sweep seems to run into an argument with ruff.

[sweep-ai-deprecated[bot]]

❌ Could not find files to change

Please join our Discord to report this issue.