Problem
The toolkit relies on three Python tools — , , and — that perform file I/O and text processing on legal documents. These tools have no automated test suite. In a legal context where accuracy is critical, untested code risks silently corrupting contracts, misplacing comments, or misreporting diffs.
Evidence
From the project structure:
There is no tests/ directory, no pytest configuration, and no test runner in requirements.txt.
Suggested approach
- Create
tests/test_parse_contract.py — test with a known .docx fixture; verify text extraction matches expected output
- Create
tests/test_add_review_comments.py — test that inline comments are injected at the correct paragraphs
- Create
tests/test_compare_versions.py — test with two known contract versions; verify detected changes match expected diffs
- Add
pytest and python-docx to requirements.txt (if not already present)
- Add a
pytest step to README.md Quick Start
I'm happy to contribute a test fixture set with sample .docx files if that helps.
Problem
The toolkit relies on three Python tools — , , and — that perform file I/O and text processing on legal documents. These tools have no automated test suite. In a legal context where accuracy is critical, untested code risks silently corrupting contracts, misplacing comments, or misreporting diffs.
Evidence
From the project structure:
There is no
tests/directory, nopytestconfiguration, and no test runner inrequirements.txt.Suggested approach
tests/test_parse_contract.py— test with a known .docx fixture; verify text extraction matches expected outputtests/test_add_review_comments.py— test that inline comments are injected at the correct paragraphstests/test_compare_versions.py— test with two known contract versions; verify detected changes match expected diffspytestandpython-docxtorequirements.txt(if not already present)pyteststep toREADME.mdQuick StartI'm happy to contribute a test fixture set with sample .docx files if that helps.