---
type: engineering-note
title: Testing Conventions
description: Tests are evidence, not documents — how this vault records test coverage without prose that drifts.
tags: [engineering, testing]
timestamp: {{DATE}}
---
<!-- ✂ docujoint template sample — replace with your own content, then delete this comment. -->
# Testing Conventions

## The rule
We do not write documents *about* tests. A test exists in this knowledge base
only as **evidence**: a `test://app/path` URI on the feature or scenario row
it proves. Coverage is then *derived* — the dashboard computes covered /
untested / drift per scenario, and "untested unhappy paths" is a number, not
an opinion.

## How to cite
- Feature rows: put the test URI in the `Tests` column of `## Features`.
- Scenario rows: same, in `## Scenarios` — every happy, unhappy and edge path
  should eventually carry one.
- With an artifact inventory connected (`dj lint --inventory`),
  cited tests that stop existing flip the row to `drift` automatically.

## What still deserves prose
Conventions (this note), and nothing else. If you feel the urge to document a
test suite, document the *flow* it proves and cite the suite as evidence.

## Open questions