fix: macro tutorial body-schema test expectations. Fixes #649

[Kocunu]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Expanded tutorial examples with more detailed test cases featuring explicit request specifications including JSON content-type headers, session authentication cookies, and properly formatted JSON-encoded payloads.
  • Restructured test scenarios to demonstrate multiple validation paths, illustrating both error handling and successful response patterns for enhanced clarity.

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The "Enforce Body Schema" test case in the tutorial data file is restructured from a single test object to an array of two distinct test entries with explicit request headers, cookies, body payloads, and expected response statuses.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Tutorial test data restructuring docs/tutorial/patterns/macro/data.ts	Replaces single test object with array of two test entries; adds explicit request headers (Content-Type: application/json), session cookie, and JSON-encoded body payloads; first entry expects 400/422 response, second expects 200

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

• Verify the JSON-encoded body payloads ("XD" and 5) match the intended test validation logic
• Confirm the response predicates and status codes align with the schema enforcement expectations

Poem

🐰 Test cases multiplied with care,
Headers explicit, cookies fair,
Schema enforced, responses clear—
Two paths instead of one appear!
Hops of structure, bounds so bright! 🎯

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: fixing test expectations in the macro tutorial for the body-schema test case.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✨ Finishing touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

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

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

docs/tutorial/patterns/macro/data.ts (1)

26-59: LGTM! Test restructuring correctly validates schema enforcement.

The change from a single test object to an array of two test entries properly covers both validation failure and success scenarios. The JSON encoding is correct, and the expected status codes are appropriate.

Optional improvements for consistency:

1. Cookie inclusion: The cookie: { session: 'valid' } field appears in both test entries but isn't used by the code under test (lines 16-18). Consider removing it unless required by the testing framework:

                 headers: {
                     'content-type': 'application/json'
-                },
-                body: '"XD"',
-                cookie: {
-                    session: 'valid'
                 }
+                body: '"XD"'
             },

2. Formatting alignment: The second test case (lines 65-86) uses raw numeric bodies without explicit headers or cookies. Consider aligning the format across test cases for consistency, or document why different approaches are used.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5e5da8b and 4f4aed0.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/tutorial/patterns/macro/data.ts (1 hunks)