test: merge test cases into single branch — achieve 70% coverage

Overview

This MR focuses on improving the testing structure and increasing code coverage across the project.

Motivation: Existing test cases were scattered across multiple branches Coverage was low (~44%) in critical modules like records, users, and auth Approach: Combined all test cases into a single branch Added new test files for uncovered modules Standardized test structure and naming Used pytest fixtures and mocking where required Outcome: Improved test organization Increased coverage significantly Easier future test maintenance

What does this MR do and why?

Changes Made

Merged test cases from multiple branches into one branch Added new test files for: API endpoints (auth, users, records, etc.) Services layer Utility functions Removed duplicate and redundant test cases Improved test structure and naming conventions Updated pytest configuration and coverage reporting

Technical Details

Used pytest with fixtures for reusable setup Implemented mocking for: Database sessions External services Background tasks Used FastAPI TestClient for endpoint testing Covered: Success responses (200) Error scenarios (400, 401, 404) Edge cases and validations

Type of Change

• 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
• ✨ New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
• 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• 📝 Documentation update
• 🎨 UI/UX improvement
• ♻️ Refactor (no functional changes)
• ⚡ Performance improvement
• 🧪 Test update
• 🔧 Configuration change
• 🚨 Security fix

Related Issues / References

Screenshots or Screen Recordings

How to Set Up and Validate Locally

Checkout this branch:

git checkout test_cases

Activate virtual environment:

source venv/bin/activate

Install dependencies:

pip install -r requirements.txt

Run tests with coverage:

python -m pytest --cov --cov-report=term-missing Expected Result: All tests pass ✅ Coverage significantly improved

Testing Done

Test Cases Covered:

Scenario	Expected Result	Status
		✅/❌
		✅/❌
		✅/❌

Code Quality Checklist

Code Standards

• Code follows project conventions (naming, structure, formatting)
• No console.log() or debugger statements left in code
• No unused imports, variables, or functions
• No duplicate code and use of existing components for reusability
• i18n check passed with no hardcoded strings in codebase for i18n support
• TypeScript types are properly defined (no any unless justified)
• ESLint and Prettier checks pass

  bun run lint

React Best Practices

• Components are properly split and single-responsibility
• Hooks follow rules (no conditional hooks, proper dependencies)
• State management is appropriate (local vs global state)
• No unnecessary re-renders (memoization used where needed)
• Event handlers are properly cleaned up

Component Patterns

• shadcn/ui components used correctly
• Tailwind classes follow utility-first approach
• Responsive design considered (mobile-first if applicable)
• Accessibility attributes included (aria-*, role, etc.)
• Icons from lucide-react used consistently

API & Data Fetching

• TanStack Query used for server state (if applicable)
• Loading and error states handled
• API types defined in src/types/api.ts
• Axios interceptors handle auth tokens correctly
• Use of Zod for data validations

Error Handling

• Errors are caught and handled gracefully
• User-friendly error messages displayed
• Errors are being toasted properly
• Network failures handled appropriately

Documentation

• README.md updated (if setup steps changed)
• .env.example updated (if new env vars added)
• CHANGELOG.md updated (if applicable)

Known Limitations / Technical Debt

Additional Notes

---

MR Acceptance Checklist

Evaluate this MR against the MR acceptance checklist. It helps you analyze changes to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.

abhilash653