Claude/create phase 6 branch 01 pcu1r rh jf uh hojnb gcz xd r

[HatmanStack]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Automated staging deploys and a guarded/manual production deploy with approval and rollback guidance.

• Tests

  • Major CI restructure: separate lint/unit/integration/e2e jobs, coverage aggregation/thresholds, extensive new unit/integration/E2E tests, and Detox E2E scaffolding.

• Documentation

  • New/expanded CI/CD, TESTING, integration/E2E, production-readiness docs and ADRs; README updated with badges and test/deploy guidance.

• Chores

  • Repo ignore updates and test/CI configuration refinements.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Adds comprehensive CI/CD and testing infrastructure, many new backend and frontend tests and fixtures, Detox E2E configuration, deployment workflows for staging/production, test utilities and documentation/ADRs, and small frontend API-call refactors (lambda URL parameter and payload field rename).

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Detox E2E Configuration ​.detoxrc.js	New Detox configuration exporting a Detox.DetoxConfig with Jest runner, app definitions (ios/android debug/release), device definitions (simulator/emulator/attached), and mapping configurations.
GitHub Actions — Backend Tests .github/workflows/backend-tests.yml	Replaces single test job with jobs: lint, unit-tests, integration-tests, e2e-tests, coverage; fixes Python to 3.12; adds artifact uploads, coverage aggregation and threshold (68%), and PR triggers.
GitHub Actions — Frontend Tests .github/workflows/frontend-tests.yml	Splits frontend jobs into lint, component-tests, integration-tests, e2e-tests, coverage; standardizes Node 24.x; adds coverage aggregation and threshold (75%) and expanded triggers.
Deployment Workflows .github/workflows/deploy-backend-staging.yml, .github/workflows/deploy-backend-production.yml	New staging (auto on main) and production (manual dispatch + approval) SAM-based deploy workflows with pre-checks, change-set creation, execution, smoke tests, monitoring, summaries and rollback guidance.
Backend Test Fixtures & Config backend/tests/conftest.py, backend/tests/integration/conftest.py, backend/tests/e2e/conftest.py, backend/tests/integration/test_config.py, backend/pytest.ini	Adds many pytest fixtures, factories, real-service fixtures, skip gates (env-driven), integration/e2e timeouts and test_config helper, and pytest.ini with markers and coverage settings.
Backend Unit Tests backend/tests/unit/*.py	New/expanded unit tests for Lambda handler, middleware, services (S3, FFmpeg, Gemini), and utils with extensive mocks.
Backend Integration & E2E Tests backend/tests/integration/*.py, backend/tests/e2e/*.py	Large integration suites (Gemini, TTS, S3, Lambda init, TTS) and E2E suites for summary/meditation flows including performance, edge, and error scenarios.
Frontend Integration Tests & Setup __tests__/integration/*, __tests__/integration/setup.ts, __tests__/integration/test-utils.tsx, __tests__/integration/README.md	Adds integration test setup, extended mocks (Expo, AsyncStorage, navigation), render helpers, and multiple integration test suites (auth, recording, meditation).
Frontend Component Tests & Utilities components/__tests__/*, components/__tests__/utils/*, components/__tests__/utils/setup.ts	Many new component/unit tests, global Jest setup, and test utilities (mock data, renderWithProviders, mockAsyncStorage, mockFetch).
Frontend API Call Refactors & Tests components/BackendSummaryCall.tsx, components/BackendMeditationCall.tsx, components/__tests__/BackendSummaryCall-test.tsx, components/__tests__/BackendMeditationCall-test.tsx	Added optional lambdaUrl parameter (defaulting to constant), URL validation, adjusted error messages, and renamed payload field (input_data → transformed_dict); tests updated to pass mock URLs and cover new error paths.
Test Utilities (integration/frontend) components/__tests__/utils/testUtils.tsx, __tests__/integration/test-utils.tsx	New shared utilities exposing mock data, render helpers for contexts, mock fetch/AsyncStorage helpers, wait utilities, and exported constants/interfaces.
Documentation & ADRs README.md, TESTING.md, docs/CI_CD.md, docs/PRODUCTION_READINESS.md, docs/adr/*, docs/plans/*, PHASE_4_*.md, PHASE_5_SUMMARY.md, PHASE_6_*.md, PLAN_REVIEW.md	Adds/updates README, testing guide, CI/CD docs, production readiness checklist, ADRs (0006–0010), phase summaries and review documents describing decisions and procedures.
Backend Integration Docs & Guides backend/INTEGRATION_TESTING.md, backend/coverage_report.txt	New backend integration/E2E testing guide and coverage report artifact.
Coverage Snapshots coverage/*	Updated coverage artifacts (clover.xml, coverage-final.json, lcov files/HTML) reflecting new test suites and component refactoring.
Misc .gitignore, package.json	Adds __pycache__/ and *.pyc to .gitignore; updates package.json testPathIgnorePatterns and adds Detox devDependencies per reviewer feedback.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Dev as Developer
    participant GH as GitHub
    participant GHA as GitHub Actions
    participant SAM as AWS SAM / CloudFormation
    participant Lambda as Lambda
    participant Ext as External Services

    Dev->>GH: Push / open PR
    GH->>GHA: Trigger backend/frontend workflows
    GHA->>GHA: Run lint → unit → integration → e2e jobs
    GHA->>GHA: Upload artifacts & coverage
    alt coverage below threshold
        GHA->>GH: Report failure in workflow summary
    else
        GHA->>GH: Report success
    end

    Dev->>GH: Manual dispatch (deploy-prod)
    GH->>GHA: Start deploy-backend-production
    GHA->>SAM: Validate & create change-set
    GHA->>Dev: Await approval
    Dev->>GHA: Approve
    GHA->>SAM: Execute change-set (CloudFormation)
    SAM->>Lambda: Update function and env
    GHA->>Lambda: Run smoke tests
    Lambda->>Ext: Call Gemini/OpenAI/S3
    Ext-->>Lambda: Return responses
    Lambda-->>GHA: Smoke OK / Fail (with rollback guidance)

Loading

sequenceDiagram
    participant Test as Frontend integration test
    participant Setup as Test setup helper
    participant Auth as AuthProvider
    participant Inc as IncidentProvider
    participant Fetch as MockFetch

    Test->>Setup: renderWithAllContexts(ui)
    Setup->>Auth: create mock user state
    Setup->>Inc: create mock incidents/music
    Setup->>Fetch: stub network responses
    Setup-->>Test: component rendered with providers
    Test->>Test: fireEvent / user interactions
    Test->>Fetch: async network calls
    Fetch-->>Test: mocked response
    Test->>Test: waitForIntegration + assertions

Loading

Estimated code review effort

🎯 4 (Complex) | ⏱️ ~60–90 minutes

Areas requiring extra attention:

• GitHub Actions workflows: secrets handling, change-set creation/execution, timeouts and PR trigger conditions.
• Backend integration/E2E fixtures and skip gates: verify gating, cleanup, and retry logic.
• Frontend E2E (Detox) config and Jest interplay.
• API-call refactors: ensure all call sites updated for lambdaUrl and transformed_dict.
• Coverage artifacts: confirm they reflect true test runs and haven't accidentally removed files.

Possibly related PRs

• Refactor upgrade #1 — Overlaps on frontend API-call changes and Detox/test scaffolding; likely related at the code/test level.

Poem

🐰 I hopped through pipelines, tests, and docs so green,

Detox and fixtures set the testing scene.
CI gates and change-sets, smoke tests in the light,
Staging hums, prod awaits the manual rite.
Hooray — tests pass, the garden's safe tonight!

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title check	❓ Inconclusive	The pull request title is vague and uninformative. It appears to be a random character string without any clear connection to the actual changes in the pull request.	Rename the pull request title to clearly describe the main changes, such as 'Phase 6: Add CI/CD workflows, documentation, and production deployment infrastructure' or similar.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 89.03% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch claude/create-phase-6-branch-01Pcu1rRHJfUhHojnbGczXdR

---

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: 22

Caution

Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.

⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)

coverage/lcov-report/index.html (1)

1-116: Coverage reports should not be committed to version control.

HTML coverage reports are auto-generated build artifacts that change with every test run. Committing these files creates unnecessary noise in git history and can cause merge conflicts.

Add coverage reports to .gitignore:

+# Coverage reports
+coverage/
+.nyc_output/
+*.lcov

These reports should be generated locally or in CI/CD pipelines but not tracked in git. If you need to share coverage results, consider:

• Using a coverage service (Codecov, Coveralls)
• Generating reports in CI and storing as artifacts
• Viewing coverage locally after running tests

Would you like me to verify what coverage-related files should be git-ignored across the repository?

🧹 Nitpick comments (56)

components/__tests__/ParallaxScrollView-test.tsx (2)

77-103: Consider consolidating redundant tests.

Several tests verify the same behavior with slightly different content:

• Lines 77-89 duplicates lines 51-62 (both verify headerImage renders)
• Lines 91-103 duplicates lines 64-75 (both verify headerText renders)
• Lines 157-170 duplicates lines 38-49 (both verify children render)

These tests could be consolidated or removed to reduce maintenance overhead without losing coverage.

Also applies to: 157-170

---

33-171: Consider adding tests for color scheme and platform differences.

The test suite covers basic rendering well, but could be enhanced with:

1. Dark mode testing: Mock useColorScheme to return 'dark' and verify the dark background color is used
2. Platform-specific behavior: The component applies different margins for Android vs iOS (as seen in the implementation). Consider testing both platforms using Platform.OS

These additions would improve confidence in the component's behavior across different environments.

backend/PHASE_2_SUMMARY.md (1)

15-42: Add blank lines around tables per markdown conventions.

The markdown linter flagged that tables should be surrounded by blank lines (MD058). While this doesn't affect functionality, it improves readability and follows community standards.

Apply this formatting fix to tables at lines 15-42:

 #### Handlers
+
 | Module | Previous | New | Target | Status |
 |--------|----------|-----|--------|--------|
 | lambda_handler.py | 31% | **83%** | 60%+ | ✅ EXCEEDED |
 | middleware.py | 18% | **84%** | 60%+ | ✅ EXCEEDED |
+
 #### Services
+
 | Module | Previous | New | Target | Status |
 |--------|----------|-----|--------|--------|
 | gemini_service.py | 0% | **82%** | 80%+ | ✅ EXCEEDED |
 | openai_tts.py | 0% | **100%** | 80%+ | ✅ EXCEEDED |
 | s3_storage_service.py | ~24% | **59%** | 80%+ | ⚠️ CLOSE |
 | ffmpeg_audio_service.py | ~20% | **68%** | 80%+ | ⚠️ CLOSE |
+
 #### Models
+
 | Module | Coverage | Notes |
 |--------|----------|-------|
 | requests.py | **91%** | Excellent |
 | responses.py | **94%** | Excellent |
+
 #### Utilities
+
 | Module | Coverage | Notes |
 |--------|----------|-------|
 | audio_utils.py | **55%** | Good |
 | file_utils.py | **37%** | Acceptable |

docs/adr/README.md (1)

113-119: Optional wording improvement for clarity.

Line 115's "Under discussion" could be more concise while maintaining meaning. Consider:

- **Proposed**: Under discussion, not yet accepted
+ **Proposed**: Not yet accepted, under discussion

Or simply:

- **Proposed**: Under discussion, not yet accepted
+ **Proposed**: Under discussion, pending acceptance

components/__tests__/history-test.tsx (3)

8-15: Mock setup prevents testing actual item rendering.

The mock returns an empty incidentList, so while tests verify that setIncidentList is called with fetched data (lines 65-96), the FlatList never actually renders items. This limits test coverage of the rendering logic.

Consider updating the mock to return the data after setIncidentList is called, or add a second test suite that mocks the context with pre-populated data to verify item rendering:

+// Additional test suite for rendering with data
+describe('ArchivedItemsScreen with data', () => {
+  beforeEach(() => {
+    jest.clearAllMocks();
+  });
+
+  it('should render items from context', () => {
+    const mockData = [
+      { id: '1', title: 'Item 1', timestamp: new Date().toISOString(), sentiment_label: 'neutral', intensity: 1 },
+      { id: '2', title: 'Item 2', timestamp: new Date().toISOString(), sentiment_label: 'neutral', intensity: 1 },
+    ];
+    
+    jest.mock('@/context/IncidentContext', () => ({
+      useIncident: () => ({
+        incidentList: mockData,
+        setIncidentList: jest.fn(),
+        musicList: [],
+        setMusicList: jest.fn(),
+      }),
+    }));
+    
+    const { getByText } = render(<ArchivedItemsScreen />);
+    expect(getByText('Item 1')).toBeTruthy();
+    expect(getByText('Item 2')).toBeTruthy();
+  });
+});

---

98-137: Consolidate redundant tests for default field verification.

Tests for timestamp (98-110), sentiment_label (112-123), and intensity (125-137) all follow the same pattern: wait for setIncidentList, then verify field presence. These could be consolidated into a single comprehensive test.

Apply this refactor to reduce duplication:

-  it('should add timestamps to items without them', async () => {
-    render(<ArchivedItemsScreen />);
-
-    await waitFor(() => {
-      expect(mockSetIncidentList).toHaveBeenCalled();
-    });
-
-    const callArgs = mockSetIncidentList.mock.calls[0][0];
-    callArgs.forEach((item: any) => {
-      expect(item.timestamp).toBeTruthy();
-      expect(typeof item.timestamp).toBe('string');
-    });
-  });
-
-  it('should set default sentiment_label for items', async () => {
-    render(<ArchivedItemsScreen />);
-
-    await waitFor(() => {
-      expect(mockSetIncidentList).toHaveBeenCalled();
-    });
-
-    const callArgs = mockSetIncidentList.mock.calls[0][0];
-    callArgs.forEach((item: any) => {
-      expect(item.sentiment_label).toBeTruthy();
-    });
-  });
-
-  it('should set default intensity for items', async () => {
-    render(<ArchivedItemsScreen />);
-
-    await waitFor(() => {
-      expect(mockSetIncidentList).toHaveBeenCalled();
-    });
-
-    const callArgs = mockSetIncidentList.mock.calls[0][0];
-    callArgs.forEach((item: any) => {
-      expect(item.intensity).toBeTruthy();
-      expect(typeof item.intensity).toBe('number');
-    });
-  });
+  it('should augment items with default fields (timestamp, sentiment_label, intensity)', async () => {
+    render(<ArchivedItemsScreen />);
+
+    await waitFor(() => {
+      expect(mockSetIncidentList).toHaveBeenCalled();
+    });
+
+    const callArgs = mockSetIncidentList.mock.calls[0][0];
+    callArgs.forEach((item: any) => {
+      // Verify timestamp
+      expect(item.timestamp).toBeTruthy();
+      expect(typeof item.timestamp).toBe('string');
+      
+      // Verify sentiment_label
+      expect(item.sentiment_label).toBeTruthy();
+      
+      // Verify intensity
+      expect(item.intensity).toBeTruthy();
+      expect(typeof item.intensity).toBe('number');
+    });
+  });

---

161-170: Test doesn't verify key extractor behavior.

The test claims to verify "FlatList with correct key extractor" but only checks that the component renders. It doesn't actually test that keyExtractor correctly extracts the id field.

This test could be removed as redundant (already covered by line 55-58), or enhanced to actually verify key extraction if you can access the FlatList props in your testing setup.

PHASE_6_REVIEWER_FEEDBACK.md (1)

42-45: Add language specifiers to fenced code blocks.

For better markdown rendering and syntax highlighting, add language specifiers to the fenced code blocks.

Apply this diff:

-```
+```text
 e2e/complete-user-journey.e2e.ts(11,69): error TS2307: Cannot find module 'detox' or its corresponding type declarations.
 e2e/error-scenarios.e2e.ts(11,69): error TS2307: Cannot find module 'detox' or its corresponding type declarations.

Commit: a65052d

Commit Message:
- +text
fix(deps): add Detox dependencies to resolve TypeScript errors

Based on static analysis hints


Also applies to: 82-97

</blockquote></details>
<details>
<summary>components/__tests__/Collapsible-test.tsx (1)</summary><blockquote>

`76-104`: **Consider enhancing prop verification tests.**

Tests for `incidentColor` (76-84) and `textType` (86-104) only verify that the component renders, not that the props are actually applied to the appropriate elements. While this may be sufficient for basic validation, deeper verification would improve test confidence.



If you want more thorough verification, you could inspect the rendered component's structure or use snapshot testing:

```diff
  it('should apply incident color to background', () => {
    const mockToggle = jest.fn();
-    const { getByText } = render(
+    const { getByText, container } = render(
      <Collapsible title="Test" isOpen={false} onToggle={mockToggle} incidentColor="#ff0000">
        <Text>Content</Text>
      </Collapsible>
    );
    expect(getByText('Test')).toBeTruthy();
+    // Optionally verify the style is applied
+    const views = container.findAll((node) => node.type === 'View');
+    expect(views.some((v) => v.props.style?.backgroundColor === '#ff0000')).toBe(true);
  });

components/__tests__/ThemedView-test.tsx (1)

6-9: Mock limits dark mode test coverage.

The useThemeColor mock always returns the light color (colors.light || '#fff'), which means the test for dark color (lines 30-37) doesn't actually verify that darkColor would be used in dark mode. It only verifies the component renders when darkColor is provided.

If you want to test dark mode behavior, you could parameterize the mock or use a more sophisticated mock that respects theme context:

-jest.mock('@/hooks/useThemeColor', () => ({
-  useThemeColor: jest.fn((colors, colorName) => colors.light || '#fff'),
-}));
+// Mock that can be configured per test
+const mockUseThemeColor = jest.fn((colors, colorName) => colors.light || '#fff');
+jest.mock('@/hooks/useThemeColor', () => ({
+  useThemeColor: mockUseThemeColor,
+}));

 describe('ThemedView', () => {
+  beforeEach(() => {
+    mockUseThemeColor.mockImplementation((colors) => colors.light || '#fff');
+  });
+  
+  // ... existing tests ...
+  
+  it('should apply dark color in dark mode', () => {
+    mockUseThemeColor.mockImplementation((colors) => colors.dark || '#000');
+    const { getByTestId } = render(
+      <ThemedView testID="themed-view" darkColor="#000000">
+        <Text>Content</Text>
+      </ThemedView>
+    );
+    // Verify dark color is applied
+    expect(getByTestId('themed-view')).toBeTruthy();
+  });

Also applies to: 30-37

components/__tests__/AudioRecording-test.tsx (1)

67-74: Test name inconsistency with assertion.

The test is named "should return null when permission is denied" but asserts expect(result).toBeUndefined(). Based on the implementation in AudioRecording.tsx, when permission is denied, the function returns early without an explicit return value, resulting in undefined rather than null.

Consider updating the test name to match the assertion:

-    it('should return null when permission is denied', async () => {
+    it('should return undefined when permission is denied', async () => {

Or if the intended behavior is to return null, update the implementation to explicitly return null instead of relying on implicit undefined.

components/BackendSummaryCall.tsx (1)

58-69: URL validation logic may be duplicated across backend call functions.

The validation logic for lambdaUrl (lines 58-69) is comprehensive and correct. However, the AI summary indicates similar changes were made to BackendMeditationCall.tsx, suggesting this validation logic is duplicated.

Consider extracting the URL validation to a shared utility function to reduce duplication and ensure consistent validation:

// utils/urlValidation.ts
export function validateLambdaUrl(url: string, functionName: string): void {
  const isValidUrl =
    url &&
    url !== 'YOUR_LAMBDA_FUNCTION_URL_HERE' &&
    (url.startsWith('https://') || url.startsWith('http://'));

  if (!isValidUrl) {
    const errorMessage = `FATAL: LAMBDA_FUNCTION_URL is not set. Please update it in ${functionName}.`;
    console.error(errorMessage);
    throw new Error(errorMessage);
  }
}

Then use it in both functions:

export async function BackendSummaryCall(
  recordingURI: string | null,
  separateTextPrompt: string,
  userId: string,
  lambdaUrl: string = LAMBDA_FUNCTION_URL
): Promise<SummaryResponse> {
  validateLambdaUrl(lambdaUrl, 'BackendSummaryCall');
  // ... rest of function
}

This would reduce code duplication and make the validation logic easier to maintain and test.

.github/workflows/deploy-backend-staging.yml (1)

103-112: Verify Lambda function name and AWS CLI availability in health check

The Lambda health step assumes:

FUNCTION_NAME="float-meditation-staging"
aws lambda get-function --function-name $FUNCTION_NAME

This will fail if the logical/physical Lambda name in template.yaml doesn’t exactly match float-meditation-staging, or if the GitHub runner doesn’t have the AWS CLI installed (SAM CLI alone is not enough for aws ... calls).

I’d recommend:

• Confirming the deployed function name (e.g., via a CloudFormation output) and using that instead of the hardcoded stack name.
• Optionally adding an explicit AWS CLI setup step if you ever move to runners without it preinstalled.

This keeps the “Lambda Function: Active” status in the summary meaningful and non-flaky.

.github/workflows/frontend-tests.yml (2)

81-108: Ensure integration tests actually produce the coverage/ directory before uploading

In the integration-tests job you run:

- name: Run integration tests
  run: npm test -- __tests__/integration/ --watchAll=false --verbose

- name: Upload integration test results
  if: always()
  uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
  with:
    name: frontend-integration-results
    path: coverage/

If Jest isn’t configured to always generate coverage for this run (no --coverage flag here), coverage/ may not exist and upload-artifact will fail the job.

Either:

• Ensure this command (or Jest config) always writes to coverage/, or
• Point path to wherever your integration test results are actually written (e.g., a junit/JSON report directory), or
• Guard the upload with an existence check.

This will prevent the artifact step from turning otherwise-healthy test runs into failures.

---

36-41: Confirm Node 24.x compatibility across your toolchain

All jobs standardize on:

uses: actions/setup-node@v4
with:
  node-version: '24.x'
  cache: 'npm'

This is great for consistency, but it does assume:

• Node 24.x is available in actions/setup-node, and
• Your React Native / Expo / tooling chain supports Node 24 without issues.

If your stack was previously validated on 18.x/20.x, it’s worth double-checking that 24.x is officially supported and that CI runners can actually provision it.

Also applies to: 63-68, 90-95, 160-165

components/__tests__/AuthScreen-test.tsx (1)

187-214: Tighten the Google web login test and avoid mutating Platform.OS globally

Two things here:

1. Google web login test isn’t actually invoking onSuccess

In your mock:

jest.mock('@react-oauth/google', () => ({
  useGoogleLogin: (config: any) => {
    mockGoogleLogin.mockImplementation(config.onSuccess);
    return mockGoogleLogin;
  },
  GoogleOAuthProvider: ({ children }: any) => <>{children}</>,
}));

mockGoogleLogin only records calls when it is invoked. In the test you do:

if (mockGoogleLogin.mock.calls.length > 0) {
  const onSuccess = mockGoogleLogin.mock.calls[0][0];
  if (typeof onSuccess === 'function') {
    await onSuccess(mockTokenResponse);
  }
}

But mockGoogleLogin is never called, so mock.calls is empty and onSuccess is never run; the test only proves that rendering on web doesn’t throw.

Given your mock, a simpler and actually effective pattern is:

-    // Simulate successful Google OAuth
-    const mockTokenResponse = { access_token: 'mock-token' };
-    if (mockGoogleLogin.mock.calls.length > 0) {
-      const onSuccess = mockGoogleLogin.mock.calls[0][0];
-      if (typeof onSuccess === 'function') {
-        await onSuccess(mockTokenResponse);
-      }
-    }
+    // Simulate successful Google OAuth: mockGoogleLogin has onSuccess as its implementation
+    const mockTokenResponse = { access_token: 'mock-token' };
+    await mockGoogleLogin(mockTokenResponse);
+
+    // Optionally assert that axios or setUser was called
+    await waitFor(() => {
+      expect(mockAxiosGet).toHaveBeenCalled();
+    });

This actually runs the onSuccess handler you wired into mockGoogleLogin.

2. Avoid permanently changing Platform.OS

// @ts-ignore
Platform.OS = 'web';

Mutating Platform.OS like this can leak into other tests in the same Jest environment. A safer pattern is to spy on the getter and restore it afterwards, e.g.:

const originalPlatformOS = Platform.OS;

afterEach(() => {
  // @ts-ignore
  Platform.OS = originalPlatformOS;
});

or by using jest.spyOn on the Platform getter if you prefer that style.

This keeps the test intent the same while making it actually validate the Google login flow and avoiding cross-test side effects.

components/BackendMeditationCall.tsx (1)

63-73: Confirm backend contract for transformed_dict and align response comment with actual shape

The changes here look good for testability and clarity, but there are two contract-related points worth double-checking:

1. Request payload key change

const payload = {
  inference_type: 'meditation',
  audio: 'NotAvailable',
  prompt: 'NotAvailable',
  music_list: musicList,
  transformed_dict: dict,
  user_id: userId,
};

You’ve renamed input_data → transformed_dict. As long as the backend Lambda has been updated to expect transformed_dict (and not the old key), this is fine, but it is a breaking change to the wire contract. Make sure the backend handler and any tests/infra (e.g., API Gateway mappings) are updated in the same PR so you don’t get 4xx/5xx from schema mismatches.

2. Response shape vs comment

The comment still says the Lambda response object has a body JSON string:

// Assuming the Lambda's response (httpResponse.json()) is an object
// that itself contains a 'body' property which is a JSON string.
const lambdaResponseObject = await httpResponse.json();

but the code now uses:

const uri = await saveResponseBase64(lambdaResponseObject.base64);
const responseMusicList = lambdaResponseObject.music_list || [];

If the backend actually still returns { statusCode, body: '{"base64": ...}' }, this will break. If you’ve updated the Lambda to return { base64, music_list } at the top level, the comment is now misleading.

I’d recommend either:

• Updating the comment to match the new flat response shape, or
• Updating the code to parse lambdaResponseObject.body if that’s still how the Lambda responds.

That will keep the frontend/backend contract clear for future changes.

Also applies to: 77-85, 101-116

docs/plans/Phase-1.md (1)

61-69: Add languages to fenced code blocks for better linting and readability

Several fenced code blocks use plain triple backticks:

feat(infrastructure): create infrastructure directory structure
...

markdownlint (MD040) is flagging these. To improve syntax highlighting and keep linters quiet, consider annotating them with appropriate languages, for example:

```bash
# shell examples
aws cloudformation describe-stack-events ...

# SAM/CloudFormation snippets
Transform: AWS::Serverless-2016-10-31

# Parameter file examples
{ "ParameterKey": "Environment", "ParameterValue": "staging" }

This is purely a documentation polish item, but it will make the phase plan easier to read and maintain.

Also applies to: 128-137, 234-242, 297-305, 368-376, 492-500, 582-590, 711-720, 808-817, 892-903

docs/CI_CD.md (1)

487-519: Add language identifier to fenced code block.

The ASCII diagram at line 487 is missing a language identifier for the fenced code block, which is flagged by markdownlint (MD040).

Apply this diff:

-```
+```text
 ┌─────────────┐
 │   GitHub    │

coverage/clover.xml (1)

1-63: Consider adding coverage reports to .gitignore.

Coverage report files like clover.xml are typically auto-generated during test runs and should not be committed to the repository. Committing these files can:

• Bloat repository size over time
• Create merge conflicts on every test run
• Expose environment-specific absolute paths (e.g., line 5: /home/user/float/components/...)

Add to .gitignore:

+# Coverage reports
+coverage/
+*.xml
+coverage-final.json

Note: Coverage reports should be generated in CI/CD pipelines and optionally uploaded to services like Codecov for historical tracking.

.github/workflows/backend-tests.yml (1)

194-206: Simplify coverage threshold enforcement using pytest-cov built-in.

The current implementation parses XML and uses bc for floating-point comparison. This can be simplified using pytest-cov's built-in threshold check.

Apply this diff:

       - name: Run all tests with combined coverage
         run: |
           cd backend
-          pytest tests/ --cov=src --cov-report=xml --cov-report=term-missing --cov-report=html
+          pytest tests/ --cov=src --cov-fail-under=68 --cov-report=xml --cov-report=term-missing --cov-report=html

       - name: Check coverage threshold
         run: |
           cd backend
           COVERAGE=$(python -c "import xml.etree.ElementTree as ET; tree = ET.parse('coverage.xml'); root = tree.getroot(); print(float(root.attrib['line-rate']) * 100)")
           echo "Coverage: $COVERAGE%"
           echo "### Coverage Report 📊" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
           echo "**Total Coverage:** ${COVERAGE}%" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
-          if (( $(echo "$COVERAGE < 68" | bc -l) )); then
-            echo "❌ Coverage below 68% threshold" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
-            exit 1
-          else
-            echo "✅ Coverage meets 68% threshold" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
-          fi
+          echo "✅ Coverage meets 68% threshold (enforced by pytest)" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY

Benefits:

• Pytest-cov provides better error messages
• Eliminates dependency on bc command
• Simpler, more maintainable code
• Fails earlier in the test run if coverage is too low

.github/workflows/deploy-backend-production.yml (1)

174-192: Enhance production smoke tests with timeout and better validation.

The current smoke test is minimal and could fail to detect issues. Consider these improvements:

       - name: Run production smoke tests
         run: |
           API_URL="${{ steps.outputs.outputs.api_url }}"
           echo "Testing production endpoint: $API_URL"

-          RESPONSE=$(curl -s -X POST "$API_URL" \
+          RESPONSE=$(curl -s --max-time 30 --fail-with-body -X POST "$API_URL" \
             -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
             -d @infrastructure/test-requests/summary-request.json)

           echo "Response: $RESPONSE"

-          if echo "$RESPONSE" | grep -q "sentiment"; then
+          # Validate JSON structure and required fields
+          if echo "$RESPONSE" | jq -e '.sentiment_label and .intensity' > /dev/null 2>&1; then
             echo "✅ Production smoke test passed"
             echo "**Smoke Test:** ✅ Passed" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
           else
-            echo "❌ Production smoke test failed"
+            echo "❌ Production smoke test failed - invalid response structure"
             echo "**Smoke Test:** ❌ Failed - INVESTIGATE IMMEDIATELY" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
+            echo "Response was: $RESPONSE" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
             exit 1
           fi

Improvements:

• --max-time 30: Fail if API doesn't respond within 30 seconds
• --fail-with-body: Return error status for HTTP errors
• jq validation: Check for actual JSON structure, not just string presence
• Better error message with actual response

coverage/coverage-final.json (1)

1-2: Coverage files should be excluded from repository.

Similar to clover.xml, this auto-generated coverage file should be in .gitignore. The minified JSON format creates unnecessarily large diffs and merge conflicts.

See the earlier comment on coverage/clover.xml for the recommended .gitignore additions.

components/__tests__/utils/testUtils.tsx (1)

194-196: Naming conflict with React Testing Library's waitFor.

The custom waitFor function (line 194) has the same name as React Testing Library's waitFor utility but serves a different purpose:

• Custom waitFor: Simple setTimeout delay
• RTL waitFor: Waits for assertions to pass with retries

This naming conflict could cause confusion when both are used in the same test file.

Consider renaming to avoid confusion:

-export function waitFor(ms: number = 100) {
+export function delay(ms: number = 100) {
   return new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, ms));
 }

Or use a more descriptive name:

export function sleep(ms: number = 100) {
  return new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, ms));
}

Note: Line 199 re-exports all of React Testing Library, which includes its own waitFor function. Using both in the same file would require aliasing:

import { waitFor as waitForExpectation } from '@testing-library/react-native';

components/__tests__/LocalFileLoadAndSave-test.tsx (4)

30-41: Strengthen assertions to verify context updates, not just storage access

This test only checks that AsyncStorage.getItem('incidentList') was called; it never verifies that mockSetIncidentList is invoked with the expected (parsed + reversed) list. Adding assertions on mockSetIncidentList will actually validate IncidentSave’s core behavior rather than just the side-effect of a storage read.

---

43-54: Mirror the incident test by asserting setMusicList receives the parsed list

Similarly, for the music list you only assert the getItem('musicList') call. Consider also asserting mockSetMusicList is called with the expected parsed list so this test fails if the load/parsing logic regresses.

---

39-40: Avoid fixed setTimeout waits; use testing-library async helpers

Using await new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, 100)) makes tests timing-dependent and potentially flaky. Prefer waitFor / waitForNextUpdate from the testing library to wait for the useEffect work to complete based on observable conditions (e.g., mockSetIncidentList / mockSetMusicList being called).

Also applies to: 52-53, 61-63

---

56-64: Replace no-op assertion in the error test with a real behavior check

expect(true).toBe(true) doesn’t assert anything about error handling. It would be more useful to assert that:

• AsyncStorage.getItem was called, and
• the component didn’t call setIncidentList / setMusicList, or
• console.error (or whatever logging you use) was called.

That way the test actually verifies graceful failure behavior.

__tests__/integration/README.md (1)

16-23: Add a language to the directory-tree code block for markdownlint

The fenced block showing the __tests__/integration/ layout has bare backticks. Adding a language ( ```text or ```bash) will satisfy markdownlint (MD040) and keep formatting consistent with the rest of the doc.

components/__tests__/BackendSummaryCall-test.tsx (1)

6-11: Prefer partial react-native mocking and reuse shared MOCK_LAMBDA_URL

Two minor maintainability points in this test file:

1. The react-native mock replaces the entire module with just Platform. If BackendSummaryCall (or future code under test) imports other React Native exports, they’ll be undefined here. A safer pattern is:

jest.mock('react-native', () => {
  const actual = jest.requireActual('react-native');
  return {
    ...actual,
    Platform: { ...actual.Platform, OS: 'web' },
  };
});

2. You already have MOCK_LAMBDA_URL defined in components/__tests__/utils/setup.ts. Reusing that shared constant here instead of redefining it locally will keep tests aligned if the mock URL ever needs to change.

Both are optional, but they’ll make these tests more robust over time.

Also applies to: 15-33, 52-131

backend/tests/unit/test_middleware.py (5)

26-87: CORS middleware tests are solid; consider asserting handler is not invoked on OPTIONS

The coverage on header injection and preflight behavior looks good and matches the implementation. You could strengthen test_preflight_options_requests_handled_correctly by asserting the wrapped handler is not called on OPTIONS (e.g., using a mock handler), which would guard against regressions in short‑circuit behavior.

---

89-197: JSON middleware tests cover the main paths; minor gap on unexpected-error path

These tests exercise valid body, invalid JSON, missing/empty body, direct Lambda events, and OPTIONS behavior in a way that aligns with json_middleware. The only untested branch is the outer except Exception path that returns a 500 via create_error_response; adding a single test that forces an unexpected exception (e.g., handler raising inside the middleware) would fully lock down the behavior.

---

198-275: Method validation middleware tests look correct and aligned with implementation

Allowed methods, disallowed methods (405), OPTIONS bypass, and direct invocation skipping are all exercised and match method_validation_middleware semantics. If you want slightly stronger assertions, you could also assert that the 405 body includes the allowed method list, but that’s purely nice‑to‑have.

---

277-349: Request validation middleware tests properly cover required-field checks

The tests for valid data, missing user_id, missing inference_type, and OPTIONS passthrough all match request_validation_middleware logic. Similar to the JSON suite, the generic 500 error path (unexpected exception in validation) is not covered; adding one test that forces an internal error would complete coverage but isn’t critical.

---

389-444: Middleware chain execution tests validate decorator order but not apply_middleware itself

The custom tracking_middleware tests the before/after ordering and short‑circuiting semantics well. However, they don’t exercise the apply_middleware helper, which also handles self binding and reverse application order. Consider adding one small test that uses @apply_middleware(...) on a dummy class method to ensure its chaining behavior doesn’t regress.

backend/INTEGRATION_TESTING.md (1)

1-364: Integration/E2E testing guide is clear; consider signaling that counts/timings are snapshots

The structure, commands, and environment guidance all look consistent and actionable. Because the test counts, performance targets, and cost estimates are hard‑coded, it might help to explicitly note that these metrics are “as of Phase 3” and may drift over time, so future changes don’t make the doc feel stale or misleading.

TESTING.md (1)

1-568: Frontend testing guide is thorough and consistent with typical RN/Jest setups

The commands, directory layout, mock patterns, and best‑practice sections align well with common React Native testing workflows and should be very usable for contributors. One small suggestion: where you show specific coverage numbers and suite counts, you might call out that they reflect Phase 4 status and will evolve over time, so readers don’t treat them as guarantees.

__tests__/integration/recording-flow-test.tsx (4)

46-82: RecordingComponent is a good lightweight harness; permission helper is currently unused

The in-test recording harness correctly models basic recording state and URI generation for the scenarios you exercise. The requestPermission helper using Audio.requestPermissionsAsync isn’t invoked anywhere yet; if you plan to test permission-denied flows later this is fine, otherwise you could either wire it into startRecording or drop it to keep the harness minimal.

---

87-168: Recording→summary component matches the backend contract and manages state cleanly

RecordingToSummaryComponent correctly gates on recordingUri, sets a processing flag, calls fetch with the expected payload, updates local summary state, and appends to incidentList via setIncidentList. Error and retry handling are straightforward and match the tests. Only minor nit: startRecording is marked async but doesn’t await anything, so you could drop async unless you plan to simulate an async recording start.

---

230-348: Recording→summary flow tests comprehensively cover the happy path and processing state

The success-path tests for generating a summary, updating the incident list, and showing the processing indicator all look sound and match the component logic and mock helpers (mockFetchSuccess, custom delayed global.fetch). Using waitForIntegration with INTEGRATION_TIMEOUTS.MEDIUM is a good way to avoid flakiness around async fetch + state updates.

Consider adding a quick assertion that incidentList actually grows in length in the success test (similar to what you do in the dedicated incident-list test) to tighten the coupling between summary generation and context updates.

---

501-525: Cleanup test is a bit low-level but correctly verifies error clearing

Recording Cleanup uses component.findAll on the underlying test instance tree to ensure the error-message node disappears after starting a new recording. This is correct but more low-level than typical Testing Library usage; consider instead exposing a queryByTestId from your render helpers and asserting queryByTestId('error-message') is null, which would be more idiomatic and slightly easier to read.

docs/adr/0008-environment-variables-secrets.md (1)

1-106: ADR clearly captures the env-var decision; maybe clarify rotation/visibility trade-offs

The decision, alternatives, and implementation details are well-documented and consistent with a small Lambda deployment using SAM parameters and GitHub secrets. Since environment variables are visible in the Lambda console to anyone with function-config access, you might explicitly call out the need to keep that IAM surface tight and document a simple manual rotation runbook (who rotates which secret where) alongside this ADR.

__tests__/integration/auth-flow-test.tsx (1)

27-49: Avoid redundant Google Sign-In mocking in this file

__tests__/integration/setup.ts already provides a detailed mock for @react-native-google-signin/google-signin. The bare jest.mock('@react-native-google-signin/google-signin') here is redundant and could diverge from the shared mock behavior over time. Consider removing this local mock (and related unused imports) and relying on the shared setup’s implementation.

backend/tests/unit/test_services.py (2)

330-406: Tighten FFmpeg unit tests by isolating subprocess and storage interactions

The FFmpeg tests correctly validate success and error cases, but combine_voice_and_music is still coupled to real path logic and select_background_music behavior during tests. To reduce brittleness and make intent clearer, consider stubbing these higher‑level dependencies:

 def test_combine_voice_and_music_empty_music_list(self, mock_storage_service):
     """Test combining voice with empty music list."""
     service = FFmpegAudioService(mock_storage_service)

-    with patch("subprocess.run") as mock_run:
-        mock_run.return_value = MagicMock(returncode=0)
+    with patch("src.services.ffmpeg_audio_service.subprocess.run") as mock_run, \
+         patch.object(service, "get_audio_duration", return_value=120.0), \
+         patch.object(service, "select_background_music", return_value=["track1.wav"]):
+        mock_run.return_value = MagicMock(returncode=0, stderr="")

         result = service.combine_voice_and_music(
             voice_path="/tmp/voice.mp3",
             music_list=[],
             timestamp="20241031120000",
             output_path="/tmp/combined.mp3",
         )

     # Verify ffmpeg was called and result is returned (returns music list, not path)
     mock_run.assert_called()
     assert isinstance(result, (str, list))

This keeps the test focused on subprocess orchestration while avoiding incidental dependencies on S3 mocks and duration parsing internals.

---

585-597: Clarify intended behavior for empty Gemini sentiment inputs

test_analyze_sentiment_with_empty_input_handles_gracefully currently asserts an AttributeError when both audio_file and user_text are None. That matches the current implementation (returning None and then accessing .text), but it bakes in somewhat odd behavior for a public service method.

If the long‑term intent is for GeminiAIService.analyze_sentiment to either:

• return a structured “no input” result, or
• raise a more descriptive ValueError,

you may want to adjust this test to reflect that desired contract, rather than the incidental AttributeError.

__tests__/integration/meditation-flow-test.tsx (1)

296-309: Align “pause and stop playback” test with its behavior

it('should pause and stop playback', ...) currently only checks the initial 'Stopped' status and doesn’t exercise the Pause or Stop buttons or any state transitions.

Either:

• extend the test to click the play, pause, and stop controls and assert the expected playback-status changes, or
• rename the test to reflect that it only verifies the initial state.

backend/tests/integration/test_s3_integration.py (1)

367-425: Relax or document strict S3 performance expectations

The performance tests assert single upload completes in <5s and 5 sequential uploads in <15s. On slower CI runners or under transient AWS/network conditions, these thresholds could be flaky even if the system is healthy.

Consider either:

• increasing the thresholds / making them configurable via test_config, or
• marking these as non-blocking performance checks (e.g., logging elapsed time and only warning when slow).

That keeps the tests informative without creating avoidable flakiness.

backend/tests/integration/test_config.py (1)

8-76: Integration test config is solid; consider minor flexibility tweaks

The centralization of keys, buckets, and skip flags is clean and matches the integration/E2E fixtures. If you ever need more granular gating (e.g., AWS-only integration tests) or alternate truthy values for SKIP_INTEGRATION_TESTS/SKIP_E2E_TESTS (like "1", "yes"), those could be added later, but nothing here blocks this PR.

backend/tests/integration/test_lambda_initialization.py (2)

18-37: Time-based assertions may be brittle across environments

The various < 2s / < 5s assertions for initialization and cold-start performance are useful guardrails, but they can become flaky on slower CI runners or under transient load. You might consider:

• Relaxing the thresholds slightly (especially the 2s ones),
• Or guarding these checks behind an env flag so they can be disabled in very constrained environments.

Functionally these tests are fine; this is just about long‑term stability in diverse CI setups.

Also applies to: 169-177, 186-195, 203-213, 225-233, 242-267, 275-323

---

352-371: Align test name/docstring with behavior for TEMP_DIR override

test_initialization_with_missing_environment_variables actually validates that the handler tolerates a custom TEMP_DIR, not missing env vars. Consider renaming the test or updating the docstring to reflect that it’s about handling overridden optional configuration, which will make the intent clearer to future readers.

backend/tests/e2e/conftest.py (1)

12-31: E2E fixtures are well-structured; consider enforcing the skip gate more globally

The E2E fixtures (real handler, event/context factories, request body factories, and S3 cleanup) are nicely composed and align with test_config semantics. One thing to watch long‑term is ensuring all E2E tests are guarded by skip_if_e2e_disabled so forks/CI without keys don’t accidentally run real flows.

If you find new tests occasionally forget to include the fixture, you could:

• Add pytestmark = pytest.mark.usefixtures("skip_if_e2e_disabled") at the module level for E2E suites, or
• Convert skip_if_e2e_disabled to an autouse session/module fixture in the E2E package.

Not required for this PR, but it would make the “graceful on forks” behavior more foolproof.

Also applies to: 78-107, 110-149, 152-183

backend/tests/e2e/test_summary_flow.py (1)

16-36: E2E summary flow currently leaks S3 artifacts

These E2E tests invoke lambda_handler_real.handle_summary_request, which persists results to S3 via the real storage service, but no test records the created S3 keys in e2e_test_s3_cleanup. Even where e2e_test_s3_cleanup is injected (sad-emotion test), it’s never used, so objects will accumulate in the test bucket over time.

Consider one of:

• Capture the bucket/key used in _store_summary_results (for example via configuration or a small test-only hook) and append (bucket, key) to e2e_test_s3_cleanup, or
• Swap in a stubbed storage service for E2E tests that avoids writing to real S3, and keep real-S3 behavior in dedicated integration tests.

__tests__/integration/test-utils.tsx (2)

85-95: preloadedState option is currently unused

IntegrationRenderOptions.preloadedState is accepted but never applied inside renderIntegration or the providers, so passing user, incidents, or music has no effect on initial context state.

Either wire this through (e.g., via custom providers that seed context state on mount or helper setters) or remove preloadedState for now to avoid implying behavior that isn’t implemented.

---

198-245: mockAsyncStorage.reset clears all Jest mocks, not just storage

mockAsyncStorage.reset() calls jest.clearAllMocks(), which resets every Jest mock in the test environment, not only the AsyncStorage-related ones. That’s surprising for a helper whose name suggests it only resets the storage mock, and resetAllMocks() already calls jest.clearAllMocks() separately.

Consider limiting mockAsyncStorage.reset() to its own state (store + its Jest fns), e.g.:

-  reset: () => {
-    mockAsyncStorage.store.clear();
-    jest.clearAllMocks();
-  },
+  reset: () => {
+    mockAsyncStorage.store.clear();
+    mockAsyncStorage.getItem.mockClear();
+    mockAsyncStorage.setItem.mockClear();
+    mockAsyncStorage.removeItem.mockClear();
+    mockAsyncStorage.clear.mockClear();
+    mockAsyncStorage.getAllKeys.mockClear();
+    mockAsyncStorage.multiGet.mockClear();
+    mockAsyncStorage.multiSet.mockClear();
+    mockAsyncStorage.multiRemove.mockClear();
+  },

and keep the global jest.clearAllMocks() only in resetAllMocks() if you still want a full test-environment reset.

backend/tests/e2e/test_meditation_flow.py (2)

348-383: Tighten error-handling tests to exercise the handler path explicitly

Both error tests use pytest.raises(Exception) in a way that blurs where the exception is coming from:

• In test_invalid_request_missing_input_data, both MeditationRequest(...) and lambda_handler_real.handle_meditation_request(request) are inside the with block, so you can’t tell whether failure happens at construction or in the handler.
• In test_invalid_request_missing_user_id, only MeditationRequest(...) is called; the handler and .validate() are never exercised, despite the comment “Will fail validation”.

To make these tests more precise and future-proof, consider restructuring them so that object construction is separate from the failing call, and both tests actually go through the handler’s validation path. For example:

-    def test_invalid_request_missing_input_data(
-        self,
-        lambda_handler_real,
-        test_user_id,
-    ):
+    def test_invalid_request_missing_input_data(
+        self,
+        lambda_handler_real,
+        test_user_id,
+    ):
         """Test meditation flow with missing input_data."""
         # Arrange
         from src.models.requests import MeditationRequest
 
-        # Act & Assert - should raise validation error
-        with pytest.raises(Exception):  # Will fail validation
-            request = MeditationRequest(
-                type="meditation",
-                user_id=test_user_id,
-                input_data=None,  # Invalid - input_data required
-                music_list=[],
-            )
-            lambda_handler_real.handle_meditation_request(request)
+        request = MeditationRequest(
+            type="meditation",
+            user_id=test_user_id,
+            input_data=None,  # Invalid - input_data required
+            music_list=[],
+        )
+
+        # Act & Assert - should raise validation error in handler
+        with pytest.raises(Exception):  # Consider narrowing to the actual exception type
+            lambda_handler_real.handle_meditation_request(request)
@@
-    def test_invalid_request_missing_user_id(self):
+    def test_invalid_request_missing_user_id(self, lambda_handler_real):
         """Test meditation flow with missing user_id."""
         # Arrange
         from src.models.requests import MeditationRequest
 
-        # Act & Assert - should raise validation error
-        with pytest.raises(Exception):  # Will fail validation
-            request = MeditationRequest(
-                type="meditation",
-                user_id=None,  # Invalid - user_id required
-                input_data={"sentiment_label": ["Sad"]},
-                music_list=[],
-            )
-
-        print(f"\n✓ Missing user_id handled with validation error")
+        request = MeditationRequest(
+            type="meditation",
+            user_id=None,  # Invalid - user_id required
+            input_data={"sentiment_label": ["Sad"]},
+            music_list=[],
+        )
+
+        # Act & Assert - should raise validation error (via handler or validation)
+        with pytest.raises(Exception):  # Again, consider a more specific exception
+            lambda_handler_real.handle_meditation_request(request)
+
+        print(f"\n✓ Missing user_id handled with validation error")

Once the underlying code path is stable, it would also be worth tightening Exception to the specific error type you expect.

---

391-444: Performance and audio-size thresholds may be brittle in CI

The hard bounds of < 90s for end-to-end latency and 1000 < audio_size < 10_000_000 characters are reasonable today but can easily become brittle as infrastructure, models, or audio settings evolve (e.g., occasional slowdowns, larger/shorter generated audio).

Consider either:

• making these thresholds slightly more conservative (e.g., higher time ceiling, wider size range), or
• gating them behind an environment flag so you can run them selectively in stricter perf pipelines without risking random CI flakes.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major

Avoid double-wrapping with Wrapper in custom rerender

renderIntegration passes wrapper: Wrapper to render, and then the custom rerender calls renderResult.rerender(<Wrapper>{element}</Wrapper>). Since React Testing Library already re-applies the wrapper on rerender, this produces nested providers (Wrapper inside Wrapper) on subsequent rerenders.

You can rely on RTL’s built-in wrapper handling:

-  return {
-    ...renderResult,
-    // Helper to re-render with same wrapper
-    rerender: (element: ReactElement) =>
-      renderResult.rerender(<Wrapper>{element}</Wrapper>),
-  };
+  return {
+    ...renderResult,
+    // Helper to re-render with same wrapper (RTL reuses the wrapper)
+    rerender: (element: ReactElement) => renderResult.rerender(element),
+  };

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change

	export function renderIntegration(
	ui: ReactElement,
	{
	withAuth = true,
	withIncident = true,
	preloadedState,
	...renderOptions
	}: IntegrationRenderOptions = {}
	) {
	function Wrapper({ children }: { children: React.ReactNode }) {
	let wrapped = <>{children}</>;
	// Wrap with IncidentProvider (real provider)
	if (withIncident) {
	wrapped = <IncidentProvider>{wrapped}</IncidentProvider>;
	}
	// Wrap with AuthProvider (real provider)
	if (withAuth) {
	wrapped = <AuthProvider>{wrapped}</AuthProvider>;
	}
	return wrapped;
	}
	const renderResult = render(ui, { wrapper: Wrapper, ...renderOptions });
	return {
	...renderResult,
	// Helper to re-render with same wrapper
	rerender: (element: ReactElement) =>
	renderResult.rerender(<Wrapper>{element}</Wrapper>),
	};
	}
	export function renderIntegration(
	ui: ReactElement,
	{
	withAuth = true,
	withIncident = true,
	preloadedState,
	...renderOptions
	}: IntegrationRenderOptions = {}
	) {
	function Wrapper({ children }: { children: React.ReactNode }) {
	let wrapped = <>{children}</>;
	// Wrap with IncidentProvider (real provider)
	if (withIncident) {
	wrapped = <IncidentProvider>{wrapped}</IncidentProvider>;
	}
	// Wrap with AuthProvider (real provider)
	if (withAuth) {
	wrapped = <AuthProvider>{wrapped}</AuthProvider>;
	}
	return wrapped;
	}
	const renderResult = render(ui, { wrapper: Wrapper, ...renderOptions });
	return {
	...renderResult,
	// Helper to re-render with same wrapper (RTL reuses the wrapper)
	rerender: (element: ReactElement) => renderResult.rerender(element),
	};
	}

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In __tests__/integration/test-utils.tsx around lines 116 to 149, the custom
rerender double-wraps the UI because render(...) is already given wrapper:
Wrapper; change the returned rerender to call renderResult.rerender(element)
(i.e., pass the element directly) instead of
renderResult.rerender(<Wrapper>{element}</Wrapper>) so RTL will reapply the
original wrapper automatically and avoid nested providers.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

🧩 Analysis chain

Verify device availability in CI environments.

The configuration uses specific device names ("iPhone 15 Pro" and "Pixel_5_API_31") which may not be available in all CI/CD environments. Consider documenting required simulator/emulator setup or using more generic device specifications.

Run the following script to verify these devices are available and document setup requirements:

Additionally, consider adding setup documentation in docs/TESTING.md or the E2E test README explaining how to create these devices if they don't exist.

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Check if iOS simulator exists
xcrun simctl list devices | grep -q "iPhone 15 Pro" || echo "⚠️  iPhone 15 Pro simulator not found"

# Check if Android emulator exists  
avdmanager list avd | grep -q "Pixel_5_API_31" || echo "⚠️  Pixel_5_API_31 AVD not found"

# List available devices for reference
echo "Available iOS Simulators:"
xcrun simctl list devices available | grep iPhone

echo -e "\nAvailable Android AVDs:"
avdmanager list avd | grep Name

Length of output: 309

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Examine the full .detoxrc.js configuration
echo "=== Full .detoxrc.js content ==="
find . -name ".detoxrc.js" -type f | head -1 | xargs cat

echo -e "\n=== CI Configuration files (GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, etc.) ==="
find . -type f \( -name "*.yml" -o -name "*.yaml" \) -path "*/.github/workflows/*" -o -path "*/.gitlab-ci.yml" | xargs ls -la 2>/dev/null

echo -e "\n=== Detox-related test scripts in package.json ==="
find . -name "package.json" -type f | head -1 | xargs grep -A5 -B5 "detox\|e2e\|test:e2e" || true

echo -e "\n=== Test documentation files ==="
find . -type f \( -name "*TEST*.md" -o -name "*test*.md" -o -name "*E2E*" -o -name "*e2e*" \) | grep -i "readme\|doc" || true

echo -e "\n=== Device/emulator setup files ==="
find . -type f -name "*setup*" -o -name "*install*" | grep -i "test\|detox\|device\|emulator" || true

Length of output: 3472

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for references to the specific device names in CI/config files
echo "=== Searching for iPhone 15 Pro references ==="
rg "iPhone 15 Pro" -n -C2

echo -e "\n=== Searching for Pixel_5_API_31 references ==="
rg "Pixel_5_API_31" -n -C2

echo -e "\n=== Searching for detox-related documentation ==="
rg "detox" -i -l --type=md | head -10

Length of output: 958

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Check CI workflow that likely runs frontend/E2E tests
echo "=== frontend-tests.yml content ==="
cat ./.github/workflows/frontend-tests.yml

echo -e "\n=== Checking e2e/README.md for iOS simulator setup ==="
cat ./e2e/README.md | head -100

Length of output: 7042

---

Add iOS simulator setup instructions to e2e/README.md.

E2E tests are skipped in CI and run locally only. Android device Pixel_5_API_31 is already documented in e2e/README.md with creation commands. However, iOS simulator setup for the specific iPhone 15 Pro device is missing. Add setup instructions parallel to the Android section (similar to the Android AVD creation commands at line 61).

For example, document how to create or verify the iPhone 15 Pro simulator exists via xcrun simctl create or confirm it's available via xcrun simctl list devices.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In .detoxrc.js around lines 36 to 53, the iOS simulator used by Detox (iPhone 15
Pro) is not documented in e2e/README.md; add a short iOS section mirroring the
Android AVD instructions that shows how to verify the simulator exists with
`xcrun simctl list devices` and how to create one if missing using `xcrun simctl
create "<name>" com.apple.CoreSimulator.SimDeviceType.iPhone-15-Pro
com.apple.CoreSimulator.SimRuntime.iOS-<version>` (or the equivalent command for
your Xcode runtime), and include notes about selecting the correct iOS
runtime/version and launching the simulator before running tests.

[coderabbitai]

🛠️ Refactor suggestion | 🟠 Major

Convert emphasis-formatted section headers to proper markdown headings.

Lines 232, 239, 246 use bold emphasis (**Option 1: ...**) instead of heading syntax (### Option 1: ...). Proper markdown headings improve document structure and navigation.

Example fix for line 232:

-**Option 1: Use Existing Layer (Recommended)**
+### Option 1: Use Existing Layer (Recommended)

Also applies to: 239-239, 246-246

🧰 Tools

🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)

232-232: Emphasis used instead of a heading

(MD036, no-emphasis-as-heading)

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In docs/plans/Phase-0.md around lines 232, 239 and 246, several section titles
are written using bold emphasis (e.g., **Option 1: Use Existing Layer
(Recommended)**); replace those emphasized lines with proper Markdown heading
syntax (for example, prepend an appropriate heading marker like "### " to
produce "### Option 1: Use Existing Layer (Recommended)") so they become real
section headers and improve document structure and navigation.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

🧩 Analysis chain

Dependency vulnerabilities require attention before production.

The document acknowledges 9 known vulnerabilities (3 high, 6 moderate) per GitHub security alerts. While this is tracked as an action item for "after Phase 6," high-severity vulnerabilities should ideally be resolved before production deployment, not after.

High-severity vulnerabilities can expose the application to security risks. Please verify which dependencies are affected and assess whether any of the 3 high-severity vulnerabilities pose an immediate risk to production deployment.

Consider resolving at least the high-severity vulnerabilities before production deployment or documenting why they're acceptable risks.

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Check GitHub security advisories for the repository
gh api graphql -f query='
{
  repository(owner: "HatmanStack", name: "float") {
    vulnerabilityAlerts(first: 10, states: OPEN) {
      nodes {
        securityAdvisory {
          summary
          severity
          description
        }
        securityVulnerability {
          package {
            name
          }
          vulnerableVersionRange
          firstPatchedVersion {
            identifier
          }
        }
        vulnerableManifestFilename
      }
    }
  }
}'

Length of output: 60

---

The GitHub API returned no open vulnerability alerts. This contradicts the review comment's claim about "9 known vulnerabilities." Let me verify the actual content of the documentation file to confirm what's really there.

---

🏁 Script executed:

```shell
#!/bin/bash
# Read the specific lines from the documentation file
sed -n '203,212p' docs/PRODUCTION_READINESS.md

Length of output: 341

---

Documentation contains contradictory and unverifiable vulnerability claims.

The document states "✅ Dependencies secure (with 9 known vulnerabilities - 3 high, 6 moderate per GitHub)" at line 209, but querying GitHub's actual security advisories returns zero open vulnerability alerts for the repository. This contradiction should be resolved:

• Either update the document to reflect the current state (if vulnerabilities were resolved)
• Or clarify where the "9 known vulnerabilities" metric originates if it's not from GitHub's security alerts
• Or remove the claim entirely if it's inaccurate

The document also contradicts itself by marking dependencies as "✅ Dependencies secure" on line 209 while claiming active vulnerabilities in the same status line.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

Minor wording/consistency nits in the final review doc

A couple of tiny polish items only:

• Line 121: consider “Markdown” (capital M) instead of “markdown” to match the proper noun.
• Line 529: “6 phases completed (Phase 0-6)” is a bit confusing numerically; either drop Phase 0 from the range or say “7 phases (Phase 0–6)” depending on how you’re counting.

These are purely editorial and don’t affect the usefulness of the document.

Also applies to: 529-547

🧰 Tools

🪛 LanguageTool

[uncategorized] ~121-~121: Did you mean the formatting language “Markdown” (= proper noun)?
Context: ..., Context, Decision, etc.) - Consistent markdown formatting throughout - Uniform checkli...

(MARKDOWN_NNP)

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In PHASE_6_FINAL_REVIEW.md around lines 119-121 and 529-547, fix minor editorial
consistency: change "markdown" to "Markdown" (capital M) at line 121, and
clarify the phase count wording in the section near lines 529-547 by either
removing "Phase 0" from the range (e.g., "Phases 1–6 completed") or rewriting to
"7 phases (Phase 0–6)" so the numeric count matches the range; apply the chosen
edit consistently wherever the phrase appears.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

Fix internal count inconsistencies in the implementation metrics

A few numbers here don’t line up with the lists beneath them:

• Line 284 says “Files Modified: 2”, but four files are listed below.
• Line 290 says “Files Created: 11”, but only ten files are enumerated.
• Line 312 says “Total Jobs: 11”, while the breakdown that follows describes 5 backend + 5 frontend + 1 staging + 3 production jobs (14 total).

Adjusting these values to match the described items will keep this summary accurate and easier to trust.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In PHASE_6_SUMMARY.md around lines 284 to 317, fix the inconsistent summary
counts: update "Files Modified: 2" to the actual count "Files Modified: 4",
verify the "Files Created" number matches the enumerated list (ensure it is "11"
if 11 items are listed) and change "Total Jobs: 11" to "Total Jobs: 14" so it
matches the breakdown (5 backend + 5 frontend + 1 staging + 3 production).
Ensure any adjacent totals or summaries reflect these corrected values.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

🧩 Analysis chain

Verify Node.js 24+ requirement.

The README specifies Node.js 24+ as a prerequisite. As of March 2025, Node.js 24 would be very recent (Node.js follows a 6-month release cycle, with even-numbered versions as LTS). Please confirm:

1. Is Node.js 24 actually required, or would Node.js 20 LTS or 22 LTS be sufficient?
2. Are there specific features from Node.js 24 that the project depends on?

Check the actual Node.js version requirements:

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Check package.json for Node.js engine requirement
if [ -f package.json ]; then
  echo "package.json engines field:"
  cat package.json | jq '.engines.node // "Not specified"'
fi

# Check .nvmrc if it exists
if [ -f .nvmrc ]; then
  echo -e "\n.nvmrc specifies:"
  cat .nvmrc
fi

# Check which Node.js features are used
echo -e "\nNode.js version in use:"
node --version

Length of output: 76

---

🌐 Web query:

What is the latest LTS version of Node.js and when was Node.js 24 released?

💡 Result:

• Latest LTS (most recent LTS major): Node.js 24 (Active LTS as of Oct 28, 2025). [1][3]
• Node.js 24 initial release (v24.0.0): May 6, 2025. [2][1]

Sources:
[1] nodejs.org — Releases table.
[2] nodejs.org blog — "Node.js v24.0.0" release notes (May 6, 2025).
[3] nodejs.org — LTS promotion (Node.js releases page showing 24 as Active LTS Oct 28, 2025).

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for Node.js 24+ specific features or API usage
echo "Searching for Node.js 24+ specific features..."

# Check for newer Node.js APIs (fetch, ReadableStream, etc. that were significantly updated in 24)
rg -i "globalThis\.fetch|require\(.*http\)" --type=js --type=ts -C2

# Check for version-specific features
echo -e "\n--- Checking for process.version checks ---"
rg "process\.version" --type=js --type=ts

# Check for async/await and recent async context features (AsyncLocalStorage is Node.js 13+, but enhanced in 24)
echo -e "\n--- Checking for AsyncLocalStorage usage ---"
rg "AsyncLocalStorage|async_context" --type=js --type=ts

# Check for recent Stream API changes
echo -e "\n--- Checking for Stream API usage ---"
rg "Readable\.from|Readable\.toWeb" --type=js --type=ts

Length of output: 176

---

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Get broader understanding of project structure
echo "=== Project Structure ==="
ls -la | head -20

echo -e "\n=== README lines 115-130 (context around line 122) ==="
if [ -f README.md ]; then
  sed -n '115,130p' README.md
fi

echo -e "\n=== package.json dependencies (first 40 lines) ==="
if [ -f package.json ]; then
  head -40 package.json
fi

echo -e "\n=== Check for src/ or similar directories ==="
fd -t d -d 1 "^(src|lib|app|index)" 2>/dev/null || echo "No standard source directories found"

echo -e "\n=== File count by type ==="
fd --type f -x file -b {} \; 2>/dev/null | awk -F: '{print $2}' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -15

Length of output: 3192

---

Add engines field to package.json and reconsider Node.js version requirement.

The README specifies Node.js 24+ but package.json lacks an engines.node field to enforce this. Additionally, codebase analysis reveals no Node.js 24+ specific features in use. For a React Native/Expo project, Node.js 20 LTS or 22 LTS are typically sufficient.

Recommend either:

1. Relax README requirement to "Node.js 20+ (LTS)" and update package.json with "engines": { "node": "^20.0.0" }, or
2. Keep 24+ requirement but add "engines": { "node": "^24.0.0" } to package.json with documentation explaining why

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 2

♻️ Duplicate comments (3)

backend/tests/integration/test_tts_integration.py (1)

353-359: Guard against zero‑size outputs before computing size ratio

As previously noted, ratio = max(size1, size2) / min(size1, size2) will raise ZeroDivisionError if either synthesized file happens to be zero bytes while synthesize_speech still returns True. That would surface as an unexpected exception instead of a clear assertion failure.

Adding an explicit non‑zero check keeps the failure mode clearer:

-            # Get file sizes
-            size1 = os.path.getsize(output_paths[0])
-            size2 = os.path.getsize(output_paths[1])
-
-            # Assert - sizes should be similar (within 50% variance)
-            ratio = max(size1, size2) / min(size1, size2)
+            # Get file sizes
+            size1 = os.path.getsize(output_paths[0])
+            size2 = os.path.getsize(output_paths[1])
+
+            # Basic sanity: files should not be empty
+            assert size1 > 0 and size2 > 0, "TTS outputs should be non-empty MP3 files"
+
+            # Assert - sizes should be similar (within 50% variance)
+            ratio = max(size1, size2) / min(size1, size2)

backend/tests/e2e/test_summary_flow.py (1)

305-340: Previous review feedback not yet addressed: tighten invalid-request tests.

The tests still use generic pytest.raises(Exception) and don't explicitly validate the request validation behavior:

1. test_invalid_request_missing_prompt: Constructs a request with prompt=None and audio="NotAvailable", but it's unclear whether the exception comes from construction, validation, or the handler.

2. test_invalid_request_missing_user_id: Only constructs the request and never calls the handler, so it only tests constructor behavior, not the full request lifecycle.

Per the SummaryRequest.validate() method in backend/src/models/requests.py, validation returns a boolean rather than raising an exception. Consider explicitly calling validate() and asserting it returns False, or determine which component raises the exception and assert on that specific type.

Example approach:

 def test_invalid_request_missing_prompt(
     self,
     lambda_handler_real,
     test_user_id,
 ):
     """Test summary flow with missing prompt field."""
-    # Arrange - create request missing prompt
     from src.models.requests import SummaryRequest

-    # Act & Assert - should raise validation error
-    with pytest.raises(Exception):  # Will fail validation
-        request = SummaryRequest(
-            type="summary",
-            user_id=test_user_id,
-            prompt=None,  # Invalid - prompt required
-            audio="NotAvailable",
-        )
-        lambda_handler_real.handle_summary_request(request)
+    # Arrange
+    request = SummaryRequest(
+        type="summary",
+        user_id=test_user_id,
+        prompt=None,
+        audio="NotAvailable",
+    )
+    
+    # Assert - validate() should return False
+    assert not request.validate(), "Request with no valid input should fail validation"

Based on learnings: This mirrors the feedback from the previous review.

.github/workflows/deploy-backend-production.yml (1)

187-226: Production smoke test is more robust than staging—apply same rigor to staging for consistency.

The production smoke test (lines 187-226) validates HTTP status code (200), captures response to file, and checks for multiple required fields ("sentiment_label", "intensity", "user_summary"), with clear error messages.

The staging smoke test (already reviewed above) only checks for "sentiment" via grep without status code validation. Align staging with production's approach for consistency and robustness across environments.

🧹 Nitpick comments (9)

backend/tests/integration/test_tts_integration.py (1)

310-327: Consider asserting that the performance test actually writes an MP3 file

test_synthesis_performance validates the timing and success flag but not that a non‑empty MP3 file was produced, which would catch cases where synthesize_speech returns True without writing output.

You can cheaply strengthen this test by asserting existence (and optionally size):

     try:
         # Act
         start_time = time.time()
         result = real_openai_tts_provider.synthesize_speech(text, output_path)
         elapsed_time = time.time() - start_time
 
         # Assert
         assert result is True, "Synthesis should succeed"
+        assert os.path.exists(output_path), "Audio file should be created"
+        assert os.path.getsize(output_path) > 0, "Audio file should not be empty"
         assert (
             elapsed_time < 10
         ), f"TTS should complete within 10s, took {elapsed_time:.2f}s"

backend/tests/e2e/test_summary_flow.py (3)

3-3: Remove unused import.

The json module is imported but never used in this file.

-import json

---

85-180: Consider adding S3 cleanup tracking to all tests that create summary requests.

Only test_complete_summary_flow_sad_emotion (lines 16-84) uses the e2e_test_s3_cleanup fixture to track and clean up S3 objects. Based on the handler code in backend/src/handlers/lambda_handler.py, all summary requests create S3 objects via _store_summary_results(). Without cleanup tracking, these tests may leave test data in S3.

Add the e2e_test_s3_cleanup parameter to each test method and include the S3 cleanup tracking logic from lines 38-59, or consider extracting this into a helper function to avoid duplication.

---

76-78: Consider making timing thresholds configurable.

The tests have hardcoded timing assertions (20s, 30s, 15s) that could be flaky in slower CI/CD environments or under load. Consider making these thresholds configurable via environment variables or test configuration to allow flexibility across different execution environments.

Example:

# In backend/tests/e2e/conftest.py or test_config.py
E2E_TIMEOUT_NORMAL = int(os.getenv("E2E_TIMEOUT_NORMAL", "20"))
E2E_TIMEOUT_LONG = int(os.getenv("E2E_TIMEOUT_LONG", "30"))
E2E_TIMEOUT_FAST = int(os.getenv("E2E_TIMEOUT_FAST", "15"))

Also applies to: 215-216, 371-372, 409-411

backend/tests/integration/test_gemini_integration.py (4)

11-248: Strong sentiment coverage; consider using retry_on_rate_limit to reduce flakiness

These sentiment tests are well‑structured and cover a good range of emotions and field validation. Since they hit the real Gemini API several times per test run, consider wrapping the analyze_sentiment calls with the existing retry_on_rate_limit fixture (as you already do for meditation tests) to make integration runs more resilient to transient 429/quota errors:

-    def test_analyze_positive_sentiment(
-        self, real_gemini_service, test_sentiment_texts, validate_json_response
-    ):
+    def test_analyze_positive_sentiment(
+        self,
+        real_gemini_service,
+        test_sentiment_texts,
+        validate_json_response,
+        retry_on_rate_limit,
+    ):
@@
-        result = real_gemini_service.analyze_sentiment(
-            audio_file="NotAvailable", user_text=positive_text
-        )
+        result = retry_on_rate_limit(
+            lambda: real_gemini_service.analyze_sentiment(
+                audio_file="NotAvailable",
+                user_text=positive_text,
+            )
+        )

You could apply the same pattern (and fixture injection) to the other sentiment tests if you find rate limits are a common source of intermittent failures.

---

256-279: SSML validation for sad meditation looks good; consider using configurable timeout

The sad‑emotion meditation test now correctly validates SSML structure via validate_ssml_response(result), which directly addresses the earlier gap. To keep timing thresholds centrally tunable (and consistent with other tests that already use test_config.GEMINI_TIMEOUT), you might want to replace the hard‑coded 60s constant with the configured timeout:

-        assert elapsed_time < 60, "Meditation generation should complete within 60s"
+        assert (
+            elapsed_time < test_config.GEMINI_TIMEOUT
+        ), "Meditation generation should complete within configured timeout"

That way you can tighten/relax limits from a single place without editing multiple tests.

---

281-405: Only one meditation test validates SSML; consider reusing the validator in another scenario

Right now validate_ssml_response is used only in the sad‑emotion meditation test. The other meditation tests (happy, anxious, various intensities, multiple instances) only assert that some content is returned and/or that it has reasonable length.

Given SSML well‑formedness is critical for TTS, it may be worth validating SSML in at least one additional scenario (e.g., happy emotion or multiple‑instances input) to guard against regressions that only appear for certain labels or multi‑incident payloads:

-    def test_generate_meditation_for_happy_emotion(
-        self, real_gemini_service, retry_on_rate_limit
-    ):
+    def test_generate_meditation_for_happy_emotion(
+        self, real_gemini_service, retry_on_rate_limit, validate_ssml_response
+    ):
@@
-        assert result, "Meditation result should not be empty"
-        assert len(result) > 50, "Meditation should have content"
+        assert result, "Meditation result should not be empty"
+        assert len(result) > 50, "Meditation should have content"
+        validate_ssml_response(result)

This keeps most tests lightweight while still exercising SSML across more than one input shape.

---

464-512: Performance tests are useful; consider centralizing thresholds and documenting flakiness trade‑offs

The performance tests provide clear upper bounds for sentiment (<15s) and meditation (<60s) calls, which is valuable. To avoid scattering “magic numbers” and to make tuning easier across environments, consider reusing a config value (e.g., test_config.GEMINI_TIMEOUT or dedicated performance thresholds) rather than hard‑coding 15/60 in multiple places.

Also, since these rely on real external latency, you may want to add a short comment noting that they are expected to be somewhat environment‑dependent and are intentionally marked @pytest.mark.slow so they can be excluded from tighter CI loops if needed.

.github/workflows/deploy-backend-staging.yml (1)

82-101: Improve smoke test robustness: add HTTP status code validation and stricter field checks.

The current smoke test only checks for "sentiment" substring presence via grep, which could match false positives (e.g., "sentiment_error") and ignores HTTP status codes. Unlike the production smoke test (which validates status 200 and multiple required fields), this lacks defensive validation.

Consider capturing the HTTP status code and validating JSON fields more strictly:

       - name: Run smoke test
         run: |
           API_URL="${{ steps.outputs.outputs.api_url }}"
           echo "Testing endpoint: $API_URL"
 
-          RESPONSE=$(curl -s -X POST "$API_URL" \
+          HTTP_CODE=$(curl -s -w "%{http_code}" -o /tmp/response.json \
+            --max-time 30 \
+            -X POST "$API_URL" \
             -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
             -d @infrastructure/test-requests/summary-request.json)
 
-          echo "Response: $RESPONSE"
+          RESPONSE=$(cat /tmp/response.json)
+          echo "HTTP Status: $HTTP_CODE"
+          echo "Response: $RESPONSE"
 
-          # Check if response contains expected fields
-          if echo "$RESPONSE" | grep -q "sentiment"; then
+          # Validate HTTP status
+          if [ "$HTTP_CODE" != "200" ]; then
+            echo "❌ Smoke test failed - HTTP $HTTP_CODE"
+            echo "**Smoke Test:** ❌ Failed (HTTP $HTTP_CODE)" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
+            exit 1
+          fi
+
+          # Check for required fields using jq or similar JSON parsing
+          if echo "$RESPONSE" | grep -q '"sentiment"'; then
             echo "✅ Smoke test passed - API responding correctly"
             echo "**Smoke Test:** ✅ Passed" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
           else
             echo "❌ Smoke test failed - unexpected response"
             echo "**Smoke Test:** ❌ Failed" >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
             exit 1
           fi

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b38d711 and 2b8127b.

📒 Files selected for processing (8)

• .github/workflows/deploy-backend-production.yml (1 hunks)
• .github/workflows/deploy-backend-staging.yml (1 hunks)
• __tests__/integration/setup.ts (1 hunks)
• backend/tests/conftest.py (2 hunks)
• backend/tests/e2e/test_summary_flow.py (1 hunks)
• backend/tests/integration/test_gemini_integration.py (1 hunks)
• backend/tests/integration/test_tts_integration.py (1 hunks)
• backend/tests/unit/test_utils.py (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

🧬 Code graph analysis (6)

__tests__/integration/setup.ts (1)

__tests__/integration/test-utils.tsx (1)

• mockAsyncStorage (198-245)

backend/tests/conftest.py (1)

backend/tests/integration/test_config.py (1)

• get_test_user_id (65-67)

backend/tests/unit/test_utils.py (2)

backend/src/utils/audio_utils.py (4)

• cleanup_temp_file (24-41)
• decode_audio_base64 (7-21)
• encode_audio_to_base64 (44-60)
• validate_audio_file (63-76)

backend/src/utils/file_utils.py (7)

• ensure_directory_exists (17-32)
• generate_request_id (12-14)
• generate_timestamp (7-9)
• get_file_extension (35-45)
• get_temp_file_path (88-105)
• is_audio_file (48-59)
• safe_filename (62-85)

backend/tests/integration/test_tts_integration.py (1)

backend/tests/integration/conftest.py (1)

• real_openai_tts_provider (75-91)

backend/tests/integration/test_gemini_integration.py (1)

backend/tests/integration/conftest.py (6)

• real_gemini_service (55-71)
• test_sentiment_texts (192-201)
• validate_json_response (219-248)
• test_meditation_input (205-215)
• validate_ssml_response (252-281)
• retry_on_rate_limit (165-188)

backend/tests/e2e/test_summary_flow.py (5)

backend/tests/e2e/conftest.py (3)

• lambda_handler_real (23-30)
• summary_request_body_factory (79-107)
• e2e_test_s3_cleanup (153-183)

backend/tests/conftest.py (1)

• test_user_id (13-15)

backend/src/handlers/lambda_handler.py (1)

• handle_summary_request (58-85)

backend/tests/integration/test_config.py (1)

• has_aws_credentials (46-48)

backend/src/models/requests.py (1)

• SummaryRequest (17-39)

🔇 Additional comments (15)

__tests__/integration/setup.ts (4)

1-15: LGTM!

The setup structure is clear and well-documented. Using the centralized mockAsyncStorage from test-utils promotes consistency across integration tests, and the 10-second timeout is appropriate for multi-component async operations.

---

17-154: LGTM!

The mocking strategy is comprehensive and provides strong test isolation. The use of jest.requireActual in the React Navigation mock (line 118) is a best practice that preserves actual utilities while mocking hooks. All mocks return sensible defaults that should support realistic integration test scenarios.

---

161-192: LGTM! Previous issue resolved.

The console suppression implementation now correctly handles non-string arguments by mapping all arguments to strings before checking (lines 164, 180). This is more robust than checking only the first argument and prevents TypeErrors when objects or errors are logged.

---

194-203: LGTM!

The cleanup logic ensures proper test isolation by restoring console methods after all tests and clearing mocks/storage between tests. The use of mockAsyncStorage.reset() aligns with the helper method defined in test-utils.tsx.

backend/tests/integration/test_tts_integration.py (1)

13-230: Strong, well‑scoped OpenAI TTS integration coverage

This class does a nice job exercising realistic scenarios (simple, SSML‑like, longer scripts, very short text, special characters, multiple sequential calls) and validating core behaviors (success flag, file creation, non‑empty output, MP3 header) with proper temp‑file cleanup and integration/slow markers. Looks good as an integration suite.

backend/tests/conftest.py (3)

9-15: LGTM! Good test isolation with unique user IDs.

The test_user_id fixture provides proper test isolation by generating unique user IDs for each test via test_config.get_test_user_id(). This aligns well with the deterministic test infrastructure described in the PR.

---

135-167: LGTM! Well-designed factory pattern.

The request_factory fixture provides excellent flexibility for creating test request bodies with sensible defaults and customization options. The factory pattern is appropriate here and will reduce test boilerplate.

---

170-282: LGTM! Comprehensive fixture coverage.

The sample and mock fixtures provide excellent test data coverage:

• Realistic response formats (JSON, SSML, FFmpeg output)
• Both valid and invalid scenarios in parametrized_requests
• Appropriate mock objects for external services (S3, Gemini)

These fixtures will enable robust integration and E2E testing as outlined in the PR objectives.

backend/tests/unit/test_utils.py (3)

27-154: LGTM! Comprehensive audio utility test coverage.

The TestAudioUtils class provides excellent coverage:

• Success cases for encoding/decoding operations
• Error handling (missing files, permissions, exceptions)
• Edge cases (empty files, custom suffixes)
• Proper resource cleanup with try/finally blocks
• Appropriate use of mocking for error scenarios

---

156-266: LGTM! Thorough file utility test coverage.

The TestFileUtils class demonstrates excellent testing practices:

• Format validation for timestamps (YYYYMMDD_HHMMSS structure)
• Range and randomness checks for request IDs
• Parametrized tests for filename sanitization covering edge cases
• Proper resource cleanup in directory tests
• Case-insensitive extension checking

---

267-276: LGTM! Previous issue successfully resolved.

The tautological assertion has been fixed as suggested in the previous review. The test now:

• Imports the time module
• Generates two paths with a 1.1-second delay between them
• Correctly asserts they are different

This properly verifies uniqueness given the 1-second timestamp granularity.

backend/tests/integration/test_gemini_integration.py (1)

408-462: Error‑handling integration tests read well and cover key edge cases

The error‑handling tests for very long text, special characters/emojis, and minimal input give good confidence that the service doesn’t blow up on tricky inputs and still returns structurally valid JSON. The current assertions (non‑empty result + validate_json_response on core fields) are a sensible balance between robustness checks and avoiding over‑specifying LLM behavior.

.github/workflows/deploy-backend-production.yml (2)

114-145: Split job structure with environment gate provides the manual approval pause—verify environment protection rules are configured.

The workflow correctly separates changeset creation (job: create-changeset) from execution (job: deploy-production):

• create-changeset (line 114) creates but does NOT execute the changeset (flag --no-execute-changeset at line 118)
• deploy-production (line 138) depends on create-changeset and is bound to the production environment (line 143-145)

This structure allows for manual review in AWS CloudFormation console before approval.

However, the production environment approval gate only pauses execution if the repository has "Required reviewers" (or "Required approval from reviewers") protection rules configured. Ensure this is set up in repository settings → Environments → production.

If protection rules are not configured, the deploy-production job will run immediately without pause, defeating the manual gate purpose.

---

43-47: Pre-deployment checks use staging credentials instead of production—verify this is intentional.

The pre-deployment-checks job (lines 42-47) configures AWS credentials using staging secrets (AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID_STAGING, AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY_STAGING, AWS_REGION_STAGING) to verify staging stack health before production deployment.

This is intentional (staging health as a prerequisite to production), but verify this doesn't cause issues if:

1. Staging and production are in different AWS accounts (cross-account access needed)
2. Staging stack name hard-coded as "float-meditation-staging" (line 55) exists and is accessible with staging credentials

If staging credentials don't have cross-account access to production resources, this check is appropriate. If they do, verify the security implications.

.github/workflows/deploy-backend-staging.yml (1)

43-46: No action required—the --lint flag is valid.

The --lint flag is officially supported by AWS SAM CLI for the sam validate command, as confirmed in the SAM CLI documentation. The code as written is correct.

[coderabbitai]

🛠️ Refactor suggestion | 🟠 Major

Move helper function to improve code organization.

The parse_request_from_dict helper is defined at module level after all test classes, which is unconventional and could cause confusion. Consider moving it to backend/tests/e2e/conftest.py alongside summary_request_body_factory (lines 78-106 in conftest.py), or at minimum, relocate it to the top of this file before the test classes.

If moving to conftest.py:

# In backend/tests/e2e/conftest.py
@pytest.fixture
def parse_summary_request():
    """Parse request dict into SummaryRequest object."""
    def _parse(request_dict):
        from src.models.requests import SummaryRequest
        return SummaryRequest(**request_dict)
    return _parse

Then update tests to use the fixture:

response = lambda_handler_real.handle_summary_request(
    parse_summary_request(request_body)
)

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In backend/tests/e2e/test_summary_flow.py around lines 417-422, the module-level
helper parse_request_from_dict is defined after all test classes; move it for
better organization either by relocating it to backend/tests/e2e/conftest.py as
a pytest fixture named parse_summary_request that returns a callable taking
request_dict and returning SummaryRequest(**request_dict), and then update tests
to call that fixture (inject parse_summary_request into tests and use
parse_summary_request(request_body)); or, if you prefer not to change conftest,
simply move the existing helper to the top of test_summary_flow.py above the
test classes so it is declared before use.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (3)

.github/workflows/deploy-backend-production.yml (3)

200-210: Smoke test assumes test request file exists without error handling.

Line 210 references infrastructure/test-requests/summary-request.json, but if this file is missing or has moved, curl -d @<file> will fail silently or with an unclear error. Add explicit validation before the test.

      - name: Run production smoke tests
        run: |
          API_URL="${{ steps.outputs.outputs.api_url }}"
          echo "Testing production endpoint: $API_URL"
+
+         # Validate test request file exists
+         TEST_REQUEST_FILE="infrastructure/test-requests/summary-request.json"
+         if [ ! -f "$TEST_REQUEST_FILE" ]; then
+           echo "❌ Test request file not found: $TEST_REQUEST_FILE"
+           exit 1
+         fi

---

241-262: Hardcoded Lambda log group name may not match SAM-generated function.

Line 248 assumes the Lambda function log group is /aws/lambda/float-meditation-production. SAM CLI generates log group names based on function logical IDs and stack configuration. If the Lambda function name differs from this convention, the query returns 0 errors (false negative), and deployment is marked as passing when error monitoring actually failed.

Please verify:

1. What is the logical ID or actual name of the Lambda function created by the SAM template?
2. Does the generated log group name match /aws/lambda/float-meditation-production?

If not, update the log group name or retrieve it dynamically from the CloudFormation stack outputs.

I can generate a script to extract the actual Lambda function name and log group from the CloudFormation stack if needed.

---

264-276: Deployment summary written only on success; consider capturing key info on failure too.

The "Deployment complete summary" step (lines 264-276) only runs if: success(), so when deployment fails, the summary won't include stack name, region, and deployed-by context. This makes post-mortem analysis harder.

Consider writing a summary on both success and failure:

-     - name: Deployment complete summary
-       if: success()
+     - name: Deployment complete summary
+       if: always()

Then conditionally format the success/failure message within the step. This preserves context for both outcomes.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2b8127b and e0fd7e4.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/workflows/deploy-backend-production.yml (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (2)

.github/workflows/deploy-backend-production.yml (2)

42-47: Staging credentials used in production pre-deployment job.

The pre-deployment-checks job uses AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID_STAGING / AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY_STAGING to check staging stack health. While this is contextually correct (checking staging before deploying to production), ensure this pattern is intentional and that these staging credentials have minimal required permissions.

Can you confirm that the staging credentials used here have been scoped to read-only access to staging resources only (per least-privilege principle)?

---

133-138: Changeset name extraction via Summaries[0] remains vulnerable to race conditions.

Lines 133-136 still query list-change-sets with Summaries[0], which assumes the first result is always the changeset just created. If another changeset is created between the sam deploy and list-change-sets call, the wrong changeset could be executed. A prior review comment indicated this was addressed, but the current implementation still has this pattern.

To verify this is safe in practice, please confirm:

1. Whether concurrent deployments to the same stack are possible (e.g., via manual triggers on different branches)
2. Whether the sam deploy command outputs the changeset name/ARN to stdout, which could be parsed directly instead of querying

Alternatively, apply the safer approach suggested in the past review to sort by creation time:

          # Capture the exact changeset name that was just created
-         CHANGESET_NAME=$(aws cloudformation list-change-sets \
-           --stack-name float-meditation-production \
-           --query 'Summaries[0].ChangeSetName' \
-           --output text)
+         CHANGESET_NAME=$(aws cloudformation list-change-sets \
+           --stack-name float-meditation-production \
+           --query 'Summaries | sort_by(@, &CreationTime) | [-1].ChangeSetName' \
+           --output text)