agent regenerated mocks from stale fixtures — the mocks now assert beh

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

The codemod treated fixtures as source code and rewrote them, so golden-file tests now fail. Decide per fixture set: if the fixtures encode behavior the codemod intentionally changed, regenerate the goldens deliberately and review the diff; if the fixtures should not have changed, revert them. Then add ignore patterns so the next run skips fixtures, and make the agent list its target files before running.

The query

agent ran the codemod over test fixtures too and now the golden files dont match the new behavior

Use this when

• Codemod rewrote test fixtures and golden files fail
• Need to exclude fixtures from a codemod run
• Golden files do not match after a codemod
• An agent's codemod touched files outside its scope

Not for

• Golden files failing because the new behavior is wrong (fix the codemod)
• Fixtures that intentionally encode the migrated behavior (regenerate deliberately)
• Test failures unrelated to file rewriting (run the tests, read the error)

Steps

1. Scope the damage

git status --short | head -40
git diff --stat | tail -5

Expected output: the list of rewritten files, split into intended targets and fixtures. Knowing the exact fixture set bounds the recovery.

2. Decide per fixture set: revert or regenerate

If the fixtures represent inputs the codemod should never transform (sample data, third-party snapshots): revert them with git checkout. If the fixtures are golden outputs of the transformed code and the new output is correct: regenerate them with the project's blessed command and review the full diff.

Expected output: a deliberate decision per set, not a blanket revert or blanket accept. The diff review is where you catch the codemod changing behavior it should not have.

3. Revert or regenerate

git checkout -- [fixture paths to revert]

or run the project's golden-update command for the sets you accept. Expected output: git status shows only intended changes plus deliberately regenerated goldens.

4. Exclude fixtures from the codemod

Add ignore patterns for fixture directories to the codemod invocation or config (jscodeshift --ignore-pattern, ast-grep --globs with negation, or the tool's config file). Expected output: a dry run of the codemod lists zero fixture files in its targets.

5. Make the agent preview its file list

The agent's codemod procedure: run with --dry-run first, print the file list, and confirm no fixture, snapshot, or generated directory appears before the real run.

Expected output: the next out-of-scope rewrite is caught at the preview, not after the fact.

Tool compatibility

Tool-agnostic: jscodeshift, ast-grep, libcst, and regex codemods all need explicit scoping.

Variant phrasings

codemod rewrote test fixtures golden files fail

Steps 1 through 3: scope, decide revert vs regenerate, execute.

exclude fixtures from jscodeshift run

Step 4: --ignore-pattern for fixture directories, verified with a dry run.

golden files dont match after codemod

Step 2: the mismatch is either correct-new-behavior (regenerate deliberately) or out-of-scope rewriting (revert).

Why it happens

Codemods match by pattern, and fixtures are designed to look like real code: that is their job. Without explicit scoping, the transform cannot distinguish "code to migrate" from "data shaped like code". Golden files then fail because the expected outputs were rewritten alongside the inputs, destroying the test's ability to judge the transform.

Edge cases

• Regenerating goldens from a buggy codemod bakes the bug into the test suite: review the regenerated diff as skeptically as a code change.
• Some fixtures SHOULD be transformed (e.g. fixtures of the new API): excluding everything fixture-shaped is as wrong as including everything. Decide per directory.
• Snapshot files of the codemod's own output are a special case: they must be regenerated, never hand-edited, or they stop testing anything.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_KFvEATMinU-jeBAi52Wekw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_KFvEATMinU-jeBAi52Wekw

Thread query: agent ran the codemod over test fixtures too and now the golden files dont match the new behavior

TL;DR: The codemod treated fixtures as source code and rewrote them, so golden-file tests now fail. Decide per fixture set: if the fixtures encode behavior the codemod intentionally changed, regenerate the goldens deliberately and review the diff; if the fixtures should not have changed, revert them. Then add ignore patterns so the next run skips fixtures, and make the agent list its target files before running.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in Search check agent by acting on the exact symptom first: run the search checks against the public help center search page or search API as a reader would, and drop the dashboard from the check path entirely, since reader results are the ground truth the check exists to measure. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.

Browser automation failed on dashboard page while checking search results

Use this when

• Work in Search check agent shows this exact symptom: Browser automation failed on dashboard page while checking search results.
• The same symptom repeats after a retry with unchanged inputs.
• Readers or support agents are blocked until this item is corrected.

Not for this skill when

• The help center platform itself is down or returning outage notices. Resolve that first, then return here if this symptom remains.
• The content is correct and you only want a style or tone rewrite. That is an editorial pass, not this fix.

Steps

1. Reproduce the symptom with the smallest scope that still shows it in Search check agent, and record the article, collection or query involved plus the exact wording from the code block above. Verify: the symptom is reproduced on demand with a named scope, not only reported second hand.
2. Apply the specific fix for this symptom: run the search checks against the public help center search page or search API as a reader would, and drop the dashboard from the check path entirely, since reader results are the ground truth the check exists to measure. Verify: the smallest failing scope now behaves as the fix predicts, checked in the published view rather than only in the editor.
3. Check neighbouring articles, collections or locales that share the same template, category or workflow, because this class of problem rarely affects only one item. Verify: the neighbouring items are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Repeat the original reader or agent action in Search check agent that exposed the symptom, using the same query, link or workflow as the first attempt. Verify: the action completes and the original symptom does not appear.
5. Compare the result against the source of truth for this item, the current product behaviour, price list, release notes or ticket evidence named in the fix. Verify: the published result matches the source or every difference is named and explained.
6. Record the fix, the scope it covered and the verification result where the content team works, so the next occurrence is recognised immediately. Verify: the record names the symptom, the fix applied and the evidence of success.

Variant phrasings

Browser automation failed on dashboard page while checking search results

The verbatim form readers and agents paste from the help center or console. Treat it identically: same fix, same single scope proof, then the wider rollout.

How to fix - browser automation failed on dashboard page when agent tried to check help center search results for an error query error timeout failure

The how to phrasing for the same problem in Search check agent. The steps above apply unchanged; start at the reproduction step rather than skipping to the final check.

Search check agent troubleshooting for this symptom

The symptom first phrasing used when the full message is hidden. Surface the full symptom first, confirm it matches the code block above, then follow the steps.

Why it happens

The dashboard shows internal search tooling, not reader results, and its dynamic pages fail automation while also measuring the wrong thing.

Edge cases

• The symptom appears in one locale, collection or audience view only. Fix that scope, then check the same item in the other views before closing.
• A cached or indexed copy keeps showing the old state after the fix. Allow for the platform reindex or cache window, recheck in a fresh reader session, and only then escalate.
• Two items have near identical titles. Confirm the identifier of the item you edited, not just its title, before declaring the fix verified.

Compatibility: Search check agent at current versions, plus the help center admin, search or API surface the query names; no extra tooling beyond reader level access to verify the published result.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_WeTj4y4r87sTXGhL8gHgBw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_WeTj4y4r87sTXGhL8gHgBw

Thread query: browser automation failed on dashboard page when agent tried to check help center search results for an error query error timeout failure

TL;DR: Fix this in Search check agent by acting on the exact symptom first: run the search checks against the public help center search page or search API as a reader would, and drop the dashboard from the check path entirely, since reader results are the ground truth the check exists to measure. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in Help Scout Docs by acting on the exact symptom first: search draft collections from the agent preview instead of the public index, and if readers need those articles, publish the collection and request a reindex rather than expecting public search to surface drafts. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.

Help Scout Docs search ignores articles inside draft collections

Use this when

• Work in Help Scout Docs shows this exact symptom: Help Scout Docs search ignores articles inside draft collections.
• The same symptom repeats after a retry with unchanged inputs.
• Readers or support agents are blocked until this item is corrected.

Not for this skill when

• The help center platform itself is down or returning outage notices. Resolve that first, then return here if this symptom remains.
• The content is correct and you only want a style or tone rewrite. That is an editorial pass, not this fix.

Steps

1. Reproduce the symptom with the smallest scope that still shows it in Help Scout Docs, and record the article, collection or query involved plus the exact wording from the code block above. Verify: the symptom is reproduced on demand with a named scope, not only reported second hand.
2. Apply the specific fix for this symptom: search draft collections from the agent preview instead of the public index, and if readers need those articles, publish the collection and request a reindex rather than expecting public search to surface drafts. Verify: the smallest failing scope now behaves as the fix predicts, checked in the published view rather than only in the editor.
3. Check neighbouring articles, collections or locales that share the same template, category or workflow, because this class of problem rarely affects only one item. Verify: the neighbouring items are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Repeat the original reader or agent action in Help Scout Docs that exposed the symptom, using the same query, link or workflow as the first attempt. Verify: the action completes and the original symptom does not appear.
5. Compare the result against the source of truth for this item, the current product behaviour, price list, release notes or ticket evidence named in the fix. Verify: the published result matches the source or every difference is named and explained.
6. Record the fix, the scope it covered and the verification result where the content team works, so the next occurrence is recognised immediately. Verify: the record names the symptom, the fix applied and the evidence of success.

Variant phrasings

Help Scout Docs search ignores articles inside draft collections

The verbatim form readers and agents paste from the help center or console. Treat it identically: same fix, same single scope proof, then the wider rollout.

How to fix - Help Scout Docs search ignores articles inside draft collections

The how to phrasing for the same problem in Help Scout Docs. The steps above apply unchanged; start at the reproduction step rather than skipping to the final check.

Help Scout Docs troubleshooting for this symptom

The symptom first phrasing used when the full message is hidden. Surface the full symptom first, confirm it matches the code block above, then follow the steps.

Why it happens

Public Docs search indexes published collections only, so articles in a draft collection are invisible to readers by design and only appear in the editor preview.

Edge cases

• The symptom appears in one locale, collection or audience view only. Fix that scope, then check the same item in the other views before closing.
• A cached or indexed copy keeps showing the old state after the fix. Allow for the platform reindex or cache window, recheck in a fresh reader session, and only then escalate.
• Two items have near identical titles. Confirm the identifier of the item you edited, not just its title, before declaring the fix verified.

Compatibility: Help Scout Docs at current versions, plus the help center admin, search or API surface the query names; no extra tooling beyond reader level access to verify the published result.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_cWReNwYpCRpZJTvjf5ojpQ

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_cWReNwYpCRpZJTvjf5ojpQ

Thread query: Help Scout Docs search ignores articles inside draft collections

TL;DR: Fix this in Help Scout Docs by acting on the exact symptom first: search draft collections from the agent preview instead of the public index, and if readers need those articles, publish the collection and request a reindex rather than expecting public search to surface drafts. Do not repeat the same edit, search or run unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one article, collection or query first, then apply it across the affected scope and confirm as a reader.