Skip to content

Commit dd47262

Browse files
author
VRTXOmega
committed
fix: strip stale pragma: no cover markers now exercised by tests
strict-no-cover caught 7 dead pragmas after the _is_cancel_scope tests went in. Three src blocks in session_group.py are now covered by the existing test suite and one test guard needed lax no cover for cross-version compat (3.10 vs 3.11+ BaseExceptionGroup alias).
1 parent ffc8bab commit dd47262

398 files changed

Lines changed: 73992 additions & 73992 deletions

File tree

Some content is hidden

Large Commits have some content hidden by default. Use the searchbox below for content that may be hidden.

‎.claude/commands/review-pr.md‎

Lines changed: 118 additions & 118 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1,118 +1,118 @@
1-
Review the pull request: $ARGUMENTS
2-
3-
Follow these steps carefully. Use the `gh` CLI for all GitHub interactions.
4-
5-
## Step 1: Resolve the PR
6-
7-
Parse `$ARGUMENTS` to determine the PR. It can be:
8-
9-
- A full URL like `https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123`
10-
- A `owner/repo#123` reference
11-
- A bare number like `123` (use the current repo)
12-
- A description — search for it with `gh pr list --search "<description>" --limit 5` and pick the best match
13-
14-
Once resolved, fetch the PR metadata:
15-
16-
```bash
17-
gh pr view <PR> --json number,title,body,author,state,baseRefName,headRefName,url,labels,milestone,additions,deletions,changedFiles,createdAt,updatedAt,mergedAt,reviewDecision,reviews,assignees
18-
```
19-
20-
## Step 2: Gather the diff
21-
22-
Get the full diff of the PR:
23-
24-
```bash
25-
gh pr diff <PR>
26-
```
27-
28-
If the diff is very large (>3000 lines), focus on the most important files first and summarize the rest.
29-
30-
## Step 3: Collect PR discussion context
31-
32-
Fetch all comments and review threads:
33-
34-
```bash
35-
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/comments --paginate
36-
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{number}/comments --paginate
37-
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/reviews --paginate
38-
```
39-
40-
Pay attention to:
41-
42-
- Reviewer feedback and requested changes
43-
- Author responses and explanations
44-
- Any unresolved conversations
45-
- Approval or rejection status
46-
47-
## Step 4: Find and read linked issues
48-
49-
Look for issue references in:
50-
51-
- The PR body (patterns like `#123`, `fixes #123`, `closes #123`, `resolves #123`)
52-
- The PR branch name (patterns like `issue-123`, `fix/123`)
53-
- Commit messages
54-
55-
For each linked issue, fetch its content:
56-
57-
```bash
58-
gh issue view <number> --json title,body,comments,labels,state
59-
```
60-
61-
Read through issue comments to understand the original problem, user reports, and any discussed solutions.
62-
63-
## Step 5: Analyze and validate
64-
65-
With all context gathered, analyze the PR critically:
66-
67-
1. **Intent alignment**: Does the code change actually solve the problem described in the PR and/or linked issues?
68-
2. **Completeness**: Are there aspects of the issue or requested feature that the PR doesn't address?
69-
3. **Scope**: Does the PR include changes unrelated to the stated goal? Are there unnecessary modifications?
70-
4. **Correctness**: Based on the diff, are there obvious bugs, edge cases, or logic errors?
71-
5. **Testing**: Does the PR include tests? Are they meaningful and do they cover the important cases?
72-
6. **Breaking changes**: Could this PR break existing functionality or APIs?
73-
7. **Unresolved feedback**: Are there reviewer comments that haven't been addressed?
74-
75-
## Step 6: Produce the review summary
76-
77-
Present the summary in this format:
78-
79-
---
80-
81-
### PR Review: `<title>` (<url>)
82-
83-
**Author:** <author> | **Status:** <state> | **Review decision:** <decision>
84-
**Base:** `<base>` ← `<head>` | **Changed files:** <n> | **+<additions> / -<deletions>**
85-
86-
#### Problem
87-
88-
<1-3 sentences describing what problem this PR is trying to solve, based on the PR description and linked issues>
89-
90-
#### Solution
91-
92-
<1-3 sentences describing the approach taken in the code>
93-
94-
#### Key changes
95-
96-
<Bulleted list of the most important changes, grouped by theme. Include file paths.>
97-
98-
#### Linked issues
99-
100-
<List of linked issues with their title, state, and a one-line summary of the discussion>
101-
102-
#### Discussion highlights
103-
104-
<Summary of important comments from reviewers and the author. Flag any unresolved threads.>
105-
106-
#### Concerns
107-
108-
<List any issues found during validation: bugs, missing tests, scope creep, unaddressed feedback, etc. If none, say "No concerns found.">
109-
110-
#### Verdict
111-
112-
<One of: APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / NEEDS DISCUSSION, with a brief justification>
113-
114-
#### Suggested action
115-
116-
<Clear recommendation for the reviewer: what to approve, what to push back on, what to ask about>
117-
118-
---
1+
Review the pull request: $ARGUMENTS
2+
3+
Follow these steps carefully. Use the `gh` CLI for all GitHub interactions.
4+
5+
## Step 1: Resolve the PR
6+
7+
Parse `$ARGUMENTS` to determine the PR. It can be:
8+
9+
- A full URL like `https://github.com/owner/repo/pull/123`
10+
- A `owner/repo#123` reference
11+
- A bare number like `123` (use the current repo)
12+
- A description — search for it with `gh pr list --search "<description>" --limit 5` and pick the best match
13+
14+
Once resolved, fetch the PR metadata:
15+
16+
```bash
17+
gh pr view <PR> --json number,title,body,author,state,baseRefName,headRefName,url,labels,milestone,additions,deletions,changedFiles,createdAt,updatedAt,mergedAt,reviewDecision,reviews,assignees
18+
```
19+
20+
## Step 2: Gather the diff
21+
22+
Get the full diff of the PR:
23+
24+
```bash
25+
gh pr diff <PR>
26+
```
27+
28+
If the diff is very large (>3000 lines), focus on the most important files first and summarize the rest.
29+
30+
## Step 3: Collect PR discussion context
31+
32+
Fetch all comments and review threads:
33+
34+
```bash
35+
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/comments --paginate
36+
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{number}/comments --paginate
37+
gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{number}/reviews --paginate
38+
```
39+
40+
Pay attention to:
41+
42+
- Reviewer feedback and requested changes
43+
- Author responses and explanations
44+
- Any unresolved conversations
45+
- Approval or rejection status
46+
47+
## Step 4: Find and read linked issues
48+
49+
Look for issue references in:
50+
51+
- The PR body (patterns like `#123`, `fixes #123`, `closes #123`, `resolves #123`)
52+
- The PR branch name (patterns like `issue-123`, `fix/123`)
53+
- Commit messages
54+
55+
For each linked issue, fetch its content:
56+
57+
```bash
58+
gh issue view <number> --json title,body,comments,labels,state
59+
```
60+
61+
Read through issue comments to understand the original problem, user reports, and any discussed solutions.
62+
63+
## Step 5: Analyze and validate
64+
65+
With all context gathered, analyze the PR critically:
66+
67+
1. **Intent alignment**: Does the code change actually solve the problem described in the PR and/or linked issues?
68+
2. **Completeness**: Are there aspects of the issue or requested feature that the PR doesn't address?
69+
3. **Scope**: Does the PR include changes unrelated to the stated goal? Are there unnecessary modifications?
70+
4. **Correctness**: Based on the diff, are there obvious bugs, edge cases, or logic errors?
71+
5. **Testing**: Does the PR include tests? Are they meaningful and do they cover the important cases?
72+
6. **Breaking changes**: Could this PR break existing functionality or APIs?
73+
7. **Unresolved feedback**: Are there reviewer comments that haven't been addressed?
74+
75+
## Step 6: Produce the review summary
76+
77+
Present the summary in this format:
78+
79+
---
80+
81+
### PR Review: `<title>` (<url>)
82+
83+
**Author:** <author> | **Status:** <state> | **Review decision:** <decision>
84+
**Base:** `<base>` ← `<head>` | **Changed files:** <n> | **+<additions> / -<deletions>**
85+
86+
#### Problem
87+
88+
<1-3 sentences describing what problem this PR is trying to solve, based on the PR description and linked issues>
89+
90+
#### Solution
91+
92+
<1-3 sentences describing the approach taken in the code>
93+
94+
#### Key changes
95+
96+
<Bulleted list of the most important changes, grouped by theme. Include file paths.>
97+
98+
#### Linked issues
99+
100+
<List of linked issues with their title, state, and a one-line summary of the discussion>
101+
102+
#### Discussion highlights
103+
104+
<Summary of important comments from reviewers and the author. Flag any unresolved threads.>
105+
106+
#### Concerns
107+
108+
<List any issues found during validation: bugs, missing tests, scope creep, unaddressed feedback, etc. If none, say "No concerns found.">
109+
110+
#### Verdict
111+
112+
<One of: APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / NEEDS DISCUSSION, with a brief justification>
113+
114+
#### Suggested action
115+
116+
<Clear recommendation for the reviewer: what to approve, what to push back on, what to ask about>
117+
118+
---

‎.git-blame-ignore-revs‎

Lines changed: 5 additions & 5 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
1-
# Applied 120 line-length rule to all files: https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk/pull/856
2-
543961968c0634e93d919d509cce23a1d6a56c21
3-
4-
# Added 100% code coverage baseline with pragma comments: https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk/pull/1553
5-
89e9c43acf7e23cf766357d776ec1ce63ac2c58e
1+
# Applied 120 line-length rule to all files: https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk/pull/856
2+
543961968c0634e93d919d509cce23a1d6a56c21
3+
4+
# Added 100% code coverage baseline with pragma comments: https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk/pull/1553
5+
89e9c43acf7e23cf766357d776ec1ce63ac2c58e

‎.gitattribute‎

Lines changed: 2 additions & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
1-
# Generated
2-
uv.lock linguist-generated=true
1+
# Generated
2+
uv.lock linguist-generated=true

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)