chore(modelarmor): enabled floor settings tests

[mihirvala-crestdata]

Description

Enabling floor settings as issue b/424365799 is fixed

Checklist

• I have followed guidelines from CONTRIBUTING.MD and Samples Style Guide
• Tests pass: npm test (see Testing)
• Lint pass: npm run lint (see Style)
• Required CI tests pass (see CI testing)
• These samples need a new API enabled in testing projects to pass (let us know which ones)
• These samples need a new/updated env vars in testing projects set to pass (let us know which ones)
• This pull request is from a branch created directly off of GoogleCloudPlatform/nodejs-docs-samples. Not a fork.
• This sample adds a new sample directory, and I updated the CODEOWNERS file with the codeowners for this sample
• This sample adds a new sample directory, and I created GitHub Actions workflow for this sample
• This sample adds a new Product API, and I updated the Blunderbuss issue/PR auto-assigner with the codeowners for this sample
• Please merge this PR for me once it is approved

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @mihirvala-crestdata, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request focuses on improving test coverage and validating the 'Floor Settings' functionality within the model-armor module. It reactivates a set of tests that were previously skipped due to a known issue (b/424365799), which has now been resolved. By enabling these tests, we ensure that the 'Floor Settings' features are properly tested and maintained.

Highlights

• Test Enablement: I have re-enabled six previously skipped tests related to 'Floor Settings' within the model-armor module. These include tests for getting and updating organization, folder, and project floor settings.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request enables a suite of tests for Model Armor floor settings, which were previously skipped. The changes are correct in enabling the tests. My review focuses on improving the robustness of these newly enabled tests. I've suggested making the get and update tests more comprehensive by verifying the state of the settings on the server after operations, rather than just checking the format of a resource name or the immediate response of an API call. This will provide stronger guarantees about the features' correctness.

[gemini-code-assist]

This test, along with should get folder floor settings and should get project floor settings, only verifies that the name property of the response matches an expected format constructed from the input ID. This doesn't validate the actual content of the floor settings.

To make these tests more robust, consider asserting other properties of the floor settings object. A more comprehensive integration test pattern would be:

1. Update the settings to a known state within the test setup.
2. Call the get...FloorSettings function.
3. Assert that the retrieved settings match the known state.

This would provide stronger guarantees that the get functionality is working as expected.

[gemini-code-assist]

This test, along with should update folder floor settings and should update project floor settings, only checks the response of the update call itself. It doesn't verify that the settings were actually persisted on the server.

A more reliable test would be to perform a get operation after the update and assert that the retrieved settings reflect the changes. For example:

1. Call updateOrganizationFloorSettings.
2. Call getOrganizationFloorSettings.
3. Assert that enableFloorSettingEnforcement is true in the settings returned by the get call.

This approach validates the end-to-end behavior of the update functionality.

Additionally, the assertion assert.equal(output.enableFloorSettingEnforcement, true) uses loose equality (==). It is recommended to use assert.strictEqual for boolean comparisons to avoid potential bugs from type coercion.