test: fix ci workflow

[hustcc]

• make ci work

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request significantly reduces test coverage by deleting several unit test files and the testing documentation, while adding a new integration test for the retrieval API and migrating the Vitest configuration to TypeScript. The review feedback emphasizes the critical need to restore the deleted unit tests to prevent regressions and recommends updating the testing documentation. Additionally, an improvement was suggested for the new integration tests to include more robust assertions for library filtering.

I am having trouble creating individual review comments. Click here to see my feedback.

tests/bm25.test.js (1-229)

This pull request removes a significant number of test files, including this one for the BM25 logic, as well as tests for the skill builder and validator. While the goal may be to fix the CI workflow, deleting tests drastically reduces coverage for critical components like query cleaning, tokenization, and synonym expansion. This introduces a high risk of regressions going unnoticed in the future.

The new retrieve.test.ts provides some integration-level testing, but it does not replace the fine-grained unit tests that were present in this file.

Please consider restoring these tests. If they were flaky, they should be fixed rather than removed. If the underlying code is no longer used, it should be removed in a separate, clearly-documented change.

tests/README.md (1-59)

This README.md file, which explained the testing strategy, network requirements, and test coverage, has been removed. This documentation was valuable for developers to understand and contribute to the test suite. Please consider adding a new, updated README.md in the __tests__ directory to document the current testing approach.

tests/retrieve.test.ts (19-22)

The assertion expect(Array.isArray(results)).toBe(true) is very weak, as the retrieve function will likely always return an array. A better test would be to assert that any returned results actually belong to the 'g6' library. This would more accurately test the library filtering functionality.

  it('should support g6 library parameter', () => {
    const results = retrieve('graph layout', 'g6');
    expect(Array.isArray(results)).toBe(true);
    // If results are returned, they should all be from the 'g6' library.
    results.forEach(skill => {
      expect(skill.library).toBe('g6');
    });
  });