Phase 2: Code quality analysis and test coverage detection

Tinker

Home Epics Phase 2: Code quality analysis and test coverage detectionEdit

Cancel

Title *

Project *

Description

Implement Phase 2: Researcher analyzes code for quality issues and test coverage gaps.

## Code Analysis Capabilities

**MCP tools needed:**
```go
get_file(path)           // Read file content
get_diff()              // Get recent git changes
rubocop_report()         // Code quality metrics
test_coverage_report()   // SimpleCov data
```

## Code Quality Analysis

**Find duplicated code:**
1. Read recent files (via get_diff for new code)
2. Use embedding or pattern matching to find similarity
3. If 3+ files share similar code → refactor proposal

**Example proposal:**
```json
{
  "title": "Extract NotificationBuilder from 5 controllers",
  "proposal_type": "refactor",
  "reasoning": "5 controllers have nearly identical notification logic (50-80 lines each). Extracting to service would reduce duplication and improve testability.",
  "confidence": "high",
  "priority": "medium",
  "metadata": {
    "duplicate_count": 5,
    "estimated_duplication": "300 lines",
    "evidence_links": [
      {"type": "code_file", "path": "app/controllers/users_controller.rb", "lines": "45-95"},
      {"type": "code_file", "path": "app/controllers/bookings_controller.rb", "lines": "120-170"},
      {"type": "code_file", "path": "app/controllers/orders_controller.rb", "lines": "80-130"}
    ]
  }
}
```

**Find code smells:**
1. Parse rubocop reports for offenses
2. High complexity methods → simplify proposal
3. Long methods/classes → extract proposal
4. Deep nesting → refactor proposal

## Test Coverage Analysis

**Find gaps via SimpleCov:**
```ruby
# Get coverage report
coverage = SimpleCov.result

# Find files with low coverage
files_below_80 = coverage.files.select { |f| f.covered_percent < 80 }

# Find specific untested methods
# (via heuristics or coverage tools)
```

**Example proposal:**
```json
{
  "title": "Add failure path tests to BookingWorkflow",
  "proposal_type": "test_gap",
  "reasoning": "BookingWorkflow has 95% coverage but only tests happy path. Payment failures, race conditions, and timeout cases are untested. These caused 2 production incidents this month.",
  "confidence": "high",
  "priority": "high",
  "metadata": {
    "current_coverage": "95%",
    "missing_scenarios": ["payment_failure", "race_condition", "timeout"],
    "evidence_links": [
      {"type": "code_file", "path": "app/services/booking_workflow.rb"},
      {"type": "ticket", "id": 450, "description": "Production incident: race condition"}
    ]
  }
}
```

## Analysis Loop (Phase 2)

```
Every 1 hour:
1. get_diff() → analyze new/changed files
2. rubocop_report() → find smells
3. Read changed files → detect duplication
4. test_coverage_report() → find gaps
5. Generate proposals
6. Store via create_proposal
```

## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] Can read file contents and diffs
- [ ] Detects code duplication across files
- [ ] Identifies code smells via rubocop
- [ ] Finds test coverage gaps
- [ ] Proposals include specific files/lines
- [ ] Metrics included in proposals