Skip to content

[Quality][Medium] Improve API error, loading, and empty-state contract: regression, accessibility, and compatibility coverage #1824

Description

@1nonlypiece

Problem

The current API error, loading, and empty-state contract implementation is a production-quality risk area: All major screens need a consistent error envelope, retry policy, loading boundary, and empty-state distinction.

This issue requires meaningful implementation and focused tests. Typo-only, documentation-only, formatting-only, dependency-only, and cosmetic changes do not satisfy the scope.

Objective

establish a durable regression contract for normal, boundary, accessibility, and compatibility behavior for the implementation anchored at src/app; src/components; src/app/api.

Scope

  • Establish the feature's explicit state, data, authorization, and failure invariants.
  • Add focused unit and integration tests for success, failure, loading, empty, retry, and permission states.
  • Verify keyboard, focus, screen-reader, responsive, and reduced-motion behavior where the feature is interactive.
  • Document the supported API/component contract and protect existing consumers from accidental breaking changes.
  • Keep the change focused on this feature and preserve unrelated public behavior.

Acceptance criteria

  • The implementation defines and enforces the relevant invariants for normal and adversarial inputs.
  • Add focused unit and integration tests for success, failure, loading, empty, retry, and permission states.
  • Verify keyboard, focus, screen-reader, responsive, and reduced-motion behavior where the feature is interactive.
  • Document the supported API/component contract and protect existing consumers from accidental breaking changes.
  • Automated tests cover success, failure, boundary, retry, and permission behavior applicable to this feature.
  • The PR includes validation commands, design tradeoffs, and any remaining limitations.
  • The PR references this issue using Refs #<issue-number>.

Priority

Medium — determined by the potential impact on correctness, user funds or data, security, availability, and implementation depth.

Non-goals

  • Do not make typo-only, documentation-only, formatting-only, dependency-only, or cosmetic changes.
  • Do not remove tests merely to make CI pass.
  • Do not introduce secrets, credentials, unsafe network defaults, or unrelated refactors.

Contributor application

Before starting, comment with relevant experience, a concise implementation approach, the main risks or tradeoffs, and an estimate for opening the first draft PR. Wait for maintainer assignment before coding.

Submission requirements

  • Use PR title format: [#<issue-number>] <short summary>.
  • Address every acceptance criterion in the PR description and implementation.
  • Include focused automated tests and validation results.
  • Explain any unavoidable limitations or pre-existing CI failures.
  • Address maintainer review feedback before requesting final review.

Quality evaluation will consider scope adherence, implementation quality, test depth, security, correctness, review responsiveness, and follow-up stability.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Stellar WaveIssues in the Stellar wave program

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions