Skip to content

Conversation

@gcatanese
Copy link
Contributor

Add few tests (i.e. LEM getLegalEntity) to verify exception handling

@gcatanese gcatanese requested review from a team as code owners October 28, 2025 17:34
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link

Summary of Changes

Hello @gcatanese, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the client library's exception handling by adding comprehensive tests for NotFoundError scenarios. It specifically addresses cases where a 404 response might contain malformed JSON and expands test coverage for the Legal Entity Management API's get_legal_entity endpoint to ensure proper error propagation and response parsing. These additions contribute to a more reliable and predictable client behavior when interacting with API services.

Highlights

  • Exception Handling Test for Invalid JSON: A new test has been added to spec/client_spec.rb to ensure that an Adyen::NotFoundError is correctly raised when the client receives a 404 HTTP response with an invalid JSON body, improving the robustness of error handling.
  • Legal Entity Management (LEM) API Tests: Two new tests have been introduced in spec/lem_spec.rb for the get_legal_entity endpoint. One verifies a successful GET call, checking the response structure, while the other confirms that Adyen::NotFoundError is raised for a 404 response from this endpoint, including validation of the error code and message.
  • New Mock Response File: A new mock JSON response file, spec/mocks/responses/LegalEntityManagement/get_legal_entity.json, has been added to support the newly implemented tests for the Legal Entity Management API.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request adds several tests to improve exception handling coverage, particularly for 404 Not Found errors. The changes are good and increase confidence in the error handling logic. I've provided a few suggestions to make the new tests more robust and readable by using more specific assertions and improving how mock data is defined.

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

@gcatanese gcatanese merged commit 09fec20 into main Oct 28, 2025
12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants