Functional test generated by RoostGPT by Divyeshzb · Pull Request #71 · roost-io/CreditCard

Divyeshzb · 2026-04-28T07:14:22Z

Please pull these awesome changes in!
Test Name     - functional-test-generation
AI Type       - Azure Open AI
AI Model      - gpt-5
Test Type     - Functional test
Use Type      - docker_ui
User Language - english

RoostGPT Logs

Using AI Model gpt-5

Copilot

Pull request overview

Adds a new RoostGPT-generated functional test suite (“functional-test-generation”) under functional_tests/, capturing a large set of API/UI scenarios and associated artifacts.

Changes:

Add generated test artifacts for the “functional-test-generation” run (.feature, .json, .csv, .xlsx) plus Roost metadata.
Append the new run’s entry to functional_tests/README.md.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 7 changed files in this pull request and generated 7 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
functional_tests/functional-test-generation/functional-test-generation.feature	Adds a large Gherkin-style feature with many API/UI scenarios for an “Aegis Card” domain.
functional_tests/functional-test-generation/functional-test-generation.json	Adds structured scenario metadata for the generated suite.
functional_tests/functional-test-generation/functional-test-generation.csv	Adds a short index/list of scenario titles.
functional_tests/functional-test-generation/functional-test-generation.xlsx	Adds an Excel export of the generated suite.
functional_tests/functional-test-generation/.roost/roost_metadata.json	Adds Roost run metadata for traceability.
functional_tests/README.md	Adds a new entry linking to the generated outputs.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-04-28T07:20:48Z

+
+**Input(s):**
+   1. Aegis_WebCC_SRS.pdf
+      Path: /var/tmp/Roost/RoostGPT/functional-test-generation/36b11f32-a33a-4901-adf0-30d3869d995c/Aegis_WebCC_SRS.pdf


The README entry records an absolute, ephemeral local path under /var/tmp for the input PDF. This reduces portability of the documentation and can leak environment-specific details; consider omitting the absolute path (or replacing with a repo-relative path / artifact name only).

Suggested change

Path: /var/tmp/Roost/RoostGPT/functional-test-generation/36b11f32-a33a-4901-adf0-30d3869d995c/Aegis_WebCC_SRS.pdf

Path: Aegis_WebCC_SRS.pdf

Copilot · 2026-04-28T07:20:49Z

+    Given the API base URL is 'https://api.aegiscard.com'
+    And the Portal URL is 'https://portal.aegiscard.com'


The Background hard-codes the API/Portal URLs. Most other functional_tests feature files set the API base URL from the 'BASE_URL' environment variable for portability across environments; hard-coding a production-like domain makes these scenarios harder to run locally/CI and inconsistent with existing tests.

Suggested change

Given the API base URL is 'https://api.aegiscard.com'

And the Portal URL is 'https://portal.aegiscard.com'

Given the API base URL is '${BASE_URL}'

And the Portal URL is '${PORTAL_URL}'

Copilot · 2026-04-28T07:20:49Z

+        "email": "user+test@domain.com",
+        "password": "weakPass1!",
+        "date_of_birth": "YYYY-17yo",
+        "phone_number": "+14165551234",
+        "ssn_last4": "1234",
+        "agree_terms": true
+      }
+      """
+      And I include header 'X-CSRF-Token' with a valid CSRF token
+    Then the response status should be 422
+      And the response should contain field errors for 'date_of_birth' and 'password'
+    When I resend a POST request to '/v2/auth/register' with JSON payload
+      """
+      {
+        "first_name": "Jo",
+        "last_name": "Tester",
+        "email": "user+test@domain.com",
+        "password": "Stronger!Passw0rd",
+        "date_of_birth": "YYYY-18y-1d",
+        "phone_number": "+14165551234",
+        "ssn_last4": "1234",
+        "agree_terms": true
+      }
+      """


The registration payload uses non-ISO placeholder values for date_of_birth (e.g., "YYYY-17yo", "YYYY-18y-1d"). As written this is not valid API input and will either break JSON/schema validation or require undocumented custom substitution logic. Prefer concrete ISO-8601 dates (or a documented test variable mechanism already used elsewhere in the repo).

Copilot · 2026-04-28T07:20:49Z

+      | <ac+0.01> | CAD   | null       | 5812 | OverLimit Rstr | OL01  | 402    | error 'INSUFFICIENT_FUNDS' and 'available_credit' returned        |
+      | 1.00   | CAD      | null       | 5411 | Normal OK      | OK01  | 200    | 'transaction_id' and 'auth_code' present                          |
+      | 10.00  | USD      | 1.2345678  | 7011 | OverPrecision  | OP01  | 400    | precision validation error for 'exchange_rate'                    |
+


In this Scenario Outline, the Examples table includes non-literal values like <ac+0.01>. Because <amount> is injected unquoted into JSON ("transaction_amount": <amount>), substituting <ac+0.01> will produce invalid JSON (and an invalid numeric value) unless there is special-case pre-processing. Use a literal number in the Examples table, or change the step to compute an over-limit amount from available_credit and inject a resolved numeric value.

Suggested change

| <ac+0.01> | CAD | null | 5812 | OverLimit Rstr | OL01 | 402 | error 'INSUFFICIENT_FUNDS' and 'available_credit' returned |

| 1.00 | CAD | null | 5411 | Normal OK | OK01 | 200 | 'transaction_id' and 'auth_code' present |

| 10.00 | USD | 1.2345678 | 7011 | OverPrecision | OP01 | 400 | precision validation error for 'exchange_rate' |

| 1.00 | CAD | null | 5411 | Normal OK | OK01 | 200 | 'transaction_id' and 'auth_code' present |

| 10.00 | USD | 1.2345678 | 7011 | OverPrecision | OP01 | 400 | precision validation error for 'exchange_rate' |

@api @transactions

Scenario: Non-essential over-limit transaction is rejected when amount exceeds available credit by 0.01

Given I have captured 'available_credit' from GET '/v2/accounts/<account_id>/summary' and card_status is Active

When I POST a CAD transaction of 'available_credit + 0.01' with mcc_code '5812' (restaurant)

Then the response status should be 402

And the response should contain error 'INSUFFICIENT_FUNDS'

And the response should contain 'available_credit'

Copilot · 2026-04-28T07:20:49Z

+  Scenario Outline: Payments validation for minimum amount, bank account validity, date scheduling, owner-only access, and success cases
+    Given I am logged in as 'user+pay@domain.com' with valid MFA and CSRF token
+    And I have captured 'total_balance' and 'minimum_payment_due' from account summary and statement
+    When I send a POST request to '/v2/accounts/<account>/payments' with JSON payload
+      """
+      {
+        "payment_amount": <amount>,
+        "payment_type": "<ptype>",
+        "bank_account_id": "<bank>",
+        "scheduled_date": "<schedule>"
+      }
+      """
+      And I include header 'X-CSRF-Token' with a valid CSRF token
+    Then the response status should be <status>
+      And the response should contain <expectation>
+
+    Examples:
+      | account      | amount | ptype            | bank     | schedule    | status | expectation                                   |
+      | <own>        | 0.99   | MINIMUM          | BANK-OK  | null        | 400    | error 'BELOW_MINIMUM' and 'minimum_payment_due' field |
+      | <own>        | 5.00   | CUSTOM           | BANK-BAD | null        | 422    | error 'INVALID_BANK_ACCOUNT'                  |
+      | <own>        | 2.00   | CUSTOM           | BANK-OK  | yesterday   | 400    | error 'PAST_DATE'                             |
+      | <own>        | 1.00   | CUSTOM           | BANK-OK  | null        | 200    | 'payment_id' and 'new_balance_estimate'       |
+      | <own>        | <stmt> | STATEMENT_BALANCE| BANK-OK  | tomorrow    | 200    | 'payment_id' and 'scheduled_date'             |
+      | <other>      | 1.00   | CUSTOM           | BANK-OK  | null        | 403    | error 'FORBIDDEN'                              |
+      | <own>        | <total>| FULL_BALANCE     | BANK-OK  | null        | 200    | 'payment_id' and 'new_balance_estimate' near zero |
+


This Payments Scenario Outline mixes placeholders like <stmt> / <total> into the unquoted numeric payment_amount field, which will yield invalid JSON unless there is an extra substitution layer. Similarly, "scheduled_date": "<schedule>" turns null into the string "null" and tokens like "yesterday"/"tomorrow" into non-ISO dates. Prefer resolving these to real numbers/dates via prior capture/compute steps, or omit the field entirely when not used.

Copilot · 2026-04-28T07:20:50Z

+[
+  {
+    "type": "end-to-end",
+    "title": "Registration to Approved Application with JWT, PKCE, CSRF, and Masked PAN",
+    "description": "Validate full journey from user registration through email verification, secure login with MFA, multi-step credit application (Steps 1-3) using session_token and CSRF headers, FICO-based approval, and dashboard masked PAN display.",
+    "testId": "TC-AEGIS-001",


This JSON output uses a top-level array, while other Roost-generated functional_tests JSON artifacts in this repo use an object wrapper with a scenarios array (e.g., functional_tests/ZBIO-5136/ZBIO-5136.json). If any tooling expects the established { "scenarios": [...] } shape, this new file will be incompatible—consider aligning the schema for consistency.

Copilot · 2026-04-28T07:20:50Z

+    "uiScreen": "Dashboard, Transactions, Statements, Payments",
+    "role": "Cardholder",
+    "authType": "OAuth2-JWT",
+    "csrfTokenUsed": "both",


Field csrfTokenUsed has inconsistent values across entries (e.g., "both", "true for POST, false for WS", etc.) vs simple "true"/"false" elsewhere. If this JSON is consumed programmatically, these free-form values make it harder to parse reliably—consider normalizing to a boolean plus an optional descriptive field for mixed cases.

Suggested change

"csrfTokenUsed": "both",

"csrfTokenUsed": true,

"csrfTokenUsageDetails": "Scenario covers both presence and absence of X-CSRF-Token on applicable state-changing requests.",

Functional test generated by RoostGPT

0b5aae9

Using AI Model gpt-5

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 28, 2026 07:14

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of Divyeshzb April 28, 2026 07:14 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 28, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Functional test generated by RoostGPT#71

Functional test generated by RoostGPT#71
Divyeshzb wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
roost-36b11f32-a33a-4901-adf0-30d3869d995c

Divyeshzb commented Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

	Path: /var/tmp/Roost/RoostGPT/functional-test-generation/36b11f32-a33a-4901-adf0-30d3869d995c/Aegis_WebCC_SRS.pdf
	Path: Aegis_WebCC_SRS.pdf

		Given the API base URL is 'https://api.aegiscard.com'
		And the Portal URL is 'https://portal.aegiscard.com'

-      | <ac+0.01> | CAD   | null       | 5812 | OverLimit Rstr | OL01  | 402    | error 'INSUFFICIENT_FUNDS' and 'available_credit' returned        |
-      | 1.00   | CAD      | null       | 5411 | Normal OK      | OK01  | 200    | 'transaction_id' and 'auth_code' present                          |
-      | 10.00  | USD      | 1.2345678  | 7011 | OverPrecision  | OP01  | 400    | precision validation error for 'exchange_rate'                    |
+      | 1.00   | CAD      | null       | 5411 | Normal OK      | OK01  | 200    | 'transaction_id' and 'auth_code' present                          |
+      | 10.00  | USD      | 1.2345678  | 7011 | OverPrecision  | OP01  | 400    | precision validation error for 'exchange_rate'                    |
+  @api @transactions
+  Scenario: Non-essential over-limit transaction is rejected when amount exceeds available credit by 0.01
+    Given I have captured 'available_credit' from GET '/v2/accounts/<account_id>/summary' and card_status is Active
+    When I POST a CAD transaction of 'available_credit + 0.01' with mcc_code '5812' (restaurant)
+    Then the response status should be 402
+      And the response should contain error 'INSUFFICIENT_FUNDS'
+      And the response should contain 'available_credit'

	"csrfTokenUsed": "both",
	"csrfTokenUsed": true,
	"csrfTokenUsageDetails": "Scenario covers both presence and absence of X-CSRF-Token on applicable state-changing requests.",

Conversation

Divyeshzb commented Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants