history

Headless validation follows current documentation and App contracts

id: LK-20260719-headless-validation-repair
date: 2026-07-19
sequence: 137
type: fix
compatibility: compatible
component: `labkit_TTestWizard_app` | `1.0.0 -> 1.0.1`
scope: Continuous integration
scope: Documentation validation
scope: Statistics

Context

The first main-branch validation after the path-derived documentation change still asserted several retired documentation paths. The same run exposed T-Test Wizard code-quality findings and a framework GUI test file that had grown beyond its review budget.

Decision and rationale

Align validation with the current path-owned documentation structure and keep Runtime-owned empty session buckets out of App factories. Resolve the static analysis findings without changing calculations, export values, or visible workflow behavior. Split the workspace-specific GUI coverage by capability so each test file remains focused.

Changes

Updated documentation guardrails to use the current testing, Runtime, and complete-App guide paths.
Removed an empty view placeholder that Runtime already supplies.
Replaced dynamic array growth in group-label and group-reassignment helpers with bounded collection.
Centralized the box-plot label and documented the plot-jitter and significance-display constants.
Split workspace-page and dynamic-table GUI coverage into its own focused test file.

User and data impact

T-Test Wizard calculations, project data, CSV values, plots, and workflows are unchanged. The App version advances to 1.0.1 to record the internal validation repair.

Compatibility and migration

Existing version-1 projects remain compatible and require no data migration. Runtime continues to provide selection, workflow, view, and cache in the final session state.

Validation

Focused contract and T-Test core tests cover the original headless failures. Hidden GUI tests cover the T-Test workflow and the extracted Runtime workspace coverage. Documentation rendering and changed-file gates validate the final main-branch handoff.

Evidence

Known limitations and follow-up

Interactive native-dialog behavior remains a developer-led manual validation responsibility; hidden GUI automation does not replace it.