[Enhancement]: Missing negative and boundary test coverage for Election lifecycle functions

[harshkumarrai]

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

Issue Description ✍️

📌 Issue Summary

📌 Problem
The Election lifecycle contracts currently focus on happy-path tests. Several
invalid or boundary scenarios are either not tested or not explicitly asserted
with revert reasons.

This creates risk of silent regressions when modifying election logic.

Examples of missing or weak coverage:
• Calling lifecycle functions before election start
• Calling lifecycle functions after election end
• Invalid timestamps or durations during election creation
• Repeated or duplicate lifecycle actions
• Boundary conditions around start/end blocks

🎯 Proposal
Add explicit negative and boundary-condition tests to ensure:
• Correct reverts with expected error selectors
• Lifecycle invariants are enforced consistently
• Future refactors cannot accidentally relax constraints

🛠️ Scope
• Tests only (no contract logic changes unless a missing revert is discovered)
• Focus on Election / ElectionFactory lifecycle functions
• Use existing Hardhat setup (or Foundry if preferred and acceptable)

I’d like to work on this issue and submit a PR with focused test additions.

Record

• I have synced all my node versions as mentioned in the project
• I am using the same version of npm as is the project
• My current branch is in sync with the development branch
• I want to work on this issue

[Abhist17]

Hi, I’d like to work on this issue.

I plan to add focused negative and boundary-condition tests for the Election and ElectionFactory lifecycle, covering pre-start calls, post-end calls, invalid timestamps/durations, duplicate lifecycle actions, and edge cases around start/end times.

Scope will be tests only using the existing Hardhat setup, unless a missing revert is uncovered.

Please assign this issue to me if that works.

[harshkumarrai]

hey @Abhist17 Hi, thanks for your interest.

I have already completed the work for this issue and opened a PR that adds negative and boundary-condition lifecycle tests for the Election contract.

To avoid duplicate effort, it would be great to continue review and discussion on the PR instead.

Happy to collaborate on follow up improvements if needed