test: added shape of setup function and its arguments by gabrieledm · Pull Request #110 · MetaMask/internal-snaps

gabrieledm · 2026-08-04T16:57:19Z

Explanation

First PR for refactor of tests under packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts to remove the usage of beforeEach and follow the Unit Testing Guidelines

To split the PRs is used the Stacked pull requests feature from GitHub

References

Checklist

I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate
I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate
I've communicated my changes to consumers by updating changelogs for packages I've changed
I've introduced breaking changes in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

gabrieledm · 2026-08-05T08:35:48Z

 import type { TransactionsRepository } from './TransactionsRepository';
 import { TransactionsService } from './TransactionsService';

+type WithTransactionServiceCallback = <ReturnValue>(payload: {}) =>


This will lead to a lint problem but it's normal since I only added the shape of the setup function and it's arguments.
In the next PRs the setup function will be used and the lint problems is not fired

## Explanation  Seventh PR of Stacked pull requests to remove the usage of `beforeEach` and follow the [Unit Testing Guidelines ](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs/blob/main/docs/testing/unit-testing.md#avoid-the-use-of-beforeeach) in the file `packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts`. The base PR is: #110 To split the PRs is used the [Stacked pull requests](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/reference/stacked-pull-requests) feature from GitHub ## References  ## Checklist - [X] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [X] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

## Explanation  Sixth PR of Stacked pull requests to remove the usage of `beforeEach` and follow the [Unit Testing Guidelines ](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs/blob/main/docs/testing/unit-testing.md#avoid-the-use-of-beforeeach) in the file `packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts`. The base PR is: #110 To split the PRs is used the [Stacked pull requests](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/reference/stacked-pull-requests) feature from GitHub ## References  ## Checklist - [X] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [X] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

## Explanation  Fifth PR of Stacked pull requests to remove the usage of `beforeEach` and follow the [Unit Testing Guidelines ](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs/blob/main/docs/testing/unit-testing.md#avoid-the-use-of-beforeeach) in the file `packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts`. The base PR is: #110 To split the PRs is used the [Stacked pull requests](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/reference/stacked-pull-requests) feature from GitHub ## References  ## Checklist - [X] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [X] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

## Explanation  Fourth PR of Stacked pull requests to remove the usage of `beforeEach` and follow the [Unit Testing Guidelines ](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs/blob/main/docs/testing/unit-testing.md#avoid-the-use-of-beforeeach) in the file `packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts`. The base PR is: #110 To split the PRs is used the [Stacked pull requests](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/reference/stacked-pull-requests) feature from GitHub ## References  ## Checklist - [X] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [X] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

…sts (#113) ## Explanation  Third PR of Stacked pull requests to remove the usage of `beforeEach` and follow the [Unit Testing Guidelines ](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs/blob/main/docs/testing/unit-testing.md#avoid-the-use-of-beforeeach) in the file `packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts`. The base PR is: #110 To split the PRs is used the [Stacked pull requests](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/reference/stacked-pull-requests) feature from GitHub ## References  ## Checklist - [X] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [X] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

## Explanation  Second PR of Stacked pull requests to remove the usage of `beforeEach` and follow the [Unit Testing Guidelines ](https://github.com/MetaMask/contributor-docs/blob/main/docs/testing/unit-testing.md#avoid-the-use-of-beforeeach) in the file `packages/tron-wallet-snap/src/services/transactions/TransactionsService.test.ts`. The base PR is: #110 To split the PRs is used the [Stacked pull requests](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/reference/stacked-pull-requests) feature from GitHub ## References  ## Checklist - [X] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [X] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/internal-snaps/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:19:08Z

+          );

-      expect(true).toBe(true);
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:19:15Z

+          expect(mockTransactionsRepository.saveMany).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
+            fetchedTransactions,
+          );
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:19:20Z

+          expect(mockTransactionsRepository.saveMany).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
+            mockTransactions,
+          );
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:19:28Z

-      expect(mockTransactionsRepository.saveMany).toHaveBeenCalledWith([]);
-      expect(true).toBe(true);
+          expect(mockTransactionsRepository.saveMany).toHaveBeenCalledWith([]);
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:19:32Z

+          expect(mockTransactionsRepository.saveMany).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
+            mockTransactions,
+          );
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:19:42Z

+          expect(
+            mockTransactionsRepository.findByAccountId,
+          ).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:19:46Z

+            mockTransactionsRepository.findByAccountId,
+          ).toHaveBeenCalledWith(mockAccount2.id);
+          expect(result).toHaveLength(2);
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:20:07Z

+            '[🧾 TransactionsService]',
+            'Failed to fetch TRC20 transactions for address TGJn1wnUYHJbvN88cynZbsAz2EMeZq73yx on network tron:728126428',
+          );
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:20:12Z

-      expect(result).toStrictEqual([]);
-      expect(true).toBe(true);
+          expect(result).toStrictEqual([]);
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:20:15Z

+          ).toHaveBeenCalledWith(Network.Shasta, mockAccount.address);

-      expect(true).toBe(true);
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:20:29Z

+          );

-      expect(true).toBe(true);
+          expect(true).toBe(true);


This should be removed

ulissesferreira · 2026-08-05T09:22:59Z

+  const transactionsService: TransactionsService = new TransactionsService({
+    logger: mockLogger,
+    transactionsRepository:
+      mockTransactionsRepository as unknown as TransactionsRepository,


I am not entirely sure, so investigate this with a time limit, but I think you should be able to not have to cast this as unknown to pass it in. I think either the mock is incomplete, and we could have it in a shared mocks place, or maybe the type of the AssetsService could get a tweak? Or maybe you are leaving those changes for another PR

The goal of this PR is to remove the beforeEach usage so honestly I didn't pay attention to this topi.
Anyway we can definitely create separate PRs dedicated to this.

…pes from different mock data sources'

…nd update fee multiplier (#110) ## Explanation This PR adjusts keyring transaction typing for Stellar trustline (change-trust) operations and changes how on-chain account sync emits balance and asset-list updates to resolve client sync/reconciliation issues. <img width="535" height="541" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/59294196-a48d-44d5-ac48-24c813c87e7a" />  ## References  ## Checklist - [ ] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [ ] I've communicated my changes to consumers by [updating changelogs for packages I've changed](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/updating-changelogs.md) - [ ] I've introduced [breaking changes](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/tree/main/docs/processes/breaking-changes.md) in this PR and have prepared draft pull requests for clients and consumer packages to resolve them

gabrieledm requested a review from a team as a code owner August 4, 2026 16:57

gabrieledm temporarily deployed to default-branch August 4, 2026 16:57 — with GitHub Actions Inactive

gabrieledm mentioned this pull request Aug 4, 2026

test: removed beforeEach usage from checkAddressActivity tests #109

Merged

4 tasks

ulissesferreira previously approved these changes Aug 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

gabrieledm mentioned this pull request Aug 4, 2026

test: removed beforeEach usage from fetchNewTransactionsForAccount tests #113

Merged

4 tasks

test: added shape of setup function and its arguments

bce82f3

gabrieledm force-pushed the chore/gabrieledm/tests/reduce-tron-tech-debth branch from 2e0a8f8 to bce82f3 Compare August 4, 2026 20:33

gabrieledm commented Aug 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

ulissesferreira dismissed their stale review via 8c4a965 August 5, 2026 09:08

ulissesferreira requested a review from a team as a code owner August 5, 2026 09:08

ulissesferreira reviewed Aug 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

gabrieledm added 2 commits August 5, 2026 14:29

test: added missed assertions for 'should handle mixed transaction ty…

3d4e132

…pes from different mock data sources'

Merge branch 'main' into chore/gabrieledm/tests/reduce-tron-tech-debth

f8c0e8e

gabrieledm added the no-changelog label Aug 5, 2026

gabrieledm added 2 commits August 5, 2026 14:41

chore: shasum

196ce2a

test: removed last 'expect(true).toBe(true)' assertion

f502594

Uh oh!

Conversation

gabrieledm commented Aug 4, 2026

Explanation

References

Checklist

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants