Fixed vignVerify and documentation

Author: mackgalante

LDT.py

@@ -202,39 +202,51 @@ def text_back(postReturn):
     log.info(f"\tComparison Value:\t{messDat.get('comparison_value')}\n")
 
 
-
-## Check output message for known-good metadata pairs...
+    
 def response_vign_verify(apiReturn, staffID):
-    log.debug("\tRunning 'response_vign_verify..")
+    log.debug("\tRunning 'response_vign_verify'...")
     validKeys = vignAccPairs.get(staffID)
-    chosenKeys = {
-        "acceptable_by": apiReturn["selected_candidate"].get("acceptable_by").lower(),
-        "measure": apiReturn["selected_candidate"].get("measure")
-    }
+    selectedCPs = apiReturn["selected_candidate"].get("acceptable_by")
+    selectedMeasure = apiReturn["selected_candidate"].get("measure")
+    matchingCP = False
+    matchingMeasure = False
+    formattedValidKeys = [      # Make print statement pretty for valid pairs
+        f"\t{item['acceptable_by'].title()}\t\t{item['measure']}" for item in validKeys
+    ]
 
-    # Make validKeys into a more readable format for printing
-    formattedValidKeys = [f"\t{item['acceptable_by'].title()}\t\t{item['measure']}" for item in validKeys]
+    if not selectedCPs or not selectedMeasure:
+        log.warning("Selected candidate is missing 'acceptable_by' or 'measure'.")
+        return
 
-    # Check keys and print results
-    if chosenKeys in validKeys:
-        log.info(f"VIGNETTE VERIFICATION:\tPASS\nValid pairs:")
-        for formattedValidKey in formattedValidKeys:
-            log.info(f"\t{formattedValidKey}")
-        log.info(f"API returned pair:\n\t\t{chosenKeys['acceptable_by'].title()}\t\t{chosenKeys['measure']}\n")
+    # Check if any of the selected CPs match the valid CPs
+    for selectedCP in selectedCPs:
+        selectedCP = selectedCP.lower()
+        for validKey in validKeys:
+            if (
+                selectedCP == validKey["acceptable_by"].lower()
+                and selectedMeasure == validKey["measure"]
+            ):
+                matchingCP = selectedCP
+                matchingMeasure = selectedMeasure
+                break
+    
+    if matchingCP and matchingMeasure:
+        log.info("\nVIGNETTE VERIFICATION:\t\tPASS")
+        log.info(f"Matched pair:\t\t{matchingCP.title()}\t\t{matchingMeasure}")
     else:
-        log.info(f"VIGNETTE VERIFICATION:\tFAIL\nExpected valid pairs:")
+        log.info("\nVIGNETTE VERIFICATION:\t\tFAIL")
         for formattedValidKey in formattedValidKeys:
-            log.info(f"\t{formattedValidKey}")
-        log.info(f"API returned pair:\n\t\t{chosenKeys['acceptable_by'].title()}\t\t{chosenKeys['measure']}\n")
-
+            log.info(f"Expected pairs:\t{formattedValidKey}")
+        log.info(f"API returned pair:\n\t\t{selectedCPs}\t\t{selectedMeasure}")
+    log.info(f"Text:\t{apiReturn['Message'].get('text_message')[:55]}\n")
 
 
 
 ## Check output message against requested Causal Pathway...
 def response_CP_verify(apiReturn, causalPathway):
     log.debug("\tRunning 'response_CP_verify'...")
     try:
-        assert causalPathway is not None and isinstance(causalPathway, str), "Causal Pathway passed to verification function is not a valid string"
+        assert causalPathway is not None and isinstance(causalPathway, str), "Causal Pathway passed is not a valid string"
         assert apiReturn["selected_candidate"].get("acceptable_by") is not None, "No 'Acceptable By' keys returned by API"
     except AssertionError as e:
         log.critical("Assertion error: " + str(e))
@@ -255,6 +267,7 @@ def response_CP_verify(apiReturn, causalPathway):
             log.info(f"No matching causal pathway found for '{causalPathway}'.\n")
 
 
+
 ## Save PFP API responses for manual review...
 def save_API_resp(postReturn, requestID):
     log.debug("\tRunning 'save_API_resp'...")

LDT_Addendum.py

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 ## Version of the Leakdown Tester
-ldtVersion = "1.0.1-beta"
+ldtVersion = "1.0.1"
 
 
 ## JSON content 'header' wrapper section for in-situ payload compilation:

changelog.md

@@ -1,20 +1,26 @@
 # Leakdown Tester Changelog
 ## Version 1.0.1
-*Released TBD*
+*Released 9/6/23*
 
 **Patch:** Fixed V&V functions with new structure of 'acceptable_by' key
 - Restored causal pathway verification with `--cpVerify`
 	- Iterates through acceptable_by pathways and searches for a match
-	- *Planned*: Verify against candidate message template links to restore specificity verification
--   
+
+- Restored vignette verification with `--vignVerify`
+	- Searches for matches in message template keys, which correlate 1:1 to causal pathways
+	- Searches for matches in measures chosen to create feedback from
+
+- *Planned:* Verify selected measures by comparing message templates
+	- Currently unnecessary, but may add functionality for further refinement of testing in the future
+
 **Improvement:** *(Documentation only)* Retroactively changed version numbers from V1 to V0 for pre-release versions
 - Updated in GitHub
 - Changelog updated
 
 ## Version 1.0.0
 *Released 8/31/2023*
 
- **Versioned:** All releases > 1.6.0 will 'live' in a new, independent repository
+ **Versioned:** All releases > 0.6.0 will 'live' in a new, independent repository
 - Repo is at [Display-lab/Leakdown-Tester](https://github.com/Display-Lab/Leakdown-Tester)
 - Liscensed with GNU General Public Liscense 3.0 (share-alike)
 - Earlier versions can be found in the caches of the [precision-feedback-pipeline](https://github.com/Display-Lab/precision-feedback-pipeline) repo

readme.md

@@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ Format for the below argument specifications:
 - Default: None
 - SetTrue: Sends performance data JSON payload from addendum file.
    + Name references the Postman API which is a solid API testing standalone service with extensive features. The major advantage for PFP testing is the ability to rapidly configure and test individual POST requests, which postwoman can also accomplish with the proper IDE setup.
+
 `--useGit` `string`
 - Default: None
 - Connects to an input message source at GitHub.com to send the target API.