Code quality review: Improve test coverage and document testing conventions

[Copilot]

Code Quality Review Plan

• Initial assessment and exploration of codebase
• Run build verification (zero warnings ✓)
• Run all tests (25/25 passing ✓)
• Check code coverage (98.7% line, 75.89% branch ✓)
• Verify code formatting (passes ✓)
• Analyze test coverage gaps
• Add missing tests for uncovered edge cases (27/27 tests now passing ✓)
• Improve code coverage to 100% line coverage, 77.43% branch ✓
• Review and improve test quality (using Assert.Contains per Microsoft recommendations ✓)
• Document testing conventions in ARCHITECTURE.md ✓
• Rename all tests to follow TestMethod_Scenario_ExpectedBehavior convention ✓
• Run code_review tool for automated feedback (addressed ✓)
• Run codeql_checker for security vulnerabilities (0 alerts found ✓)
• Final verification complete ✓

Original prompt

Please review the code in this repository and ensure the code quality is appropriate and the tests are sufficient.

Custom agent used: Software Quality Enforcer
Code quality specialist focused on enforcing testing standards and code coverage, running static analysis and linting, performing code reviews and quality gates, and ensuring zero-warning builds.

---

✨ Let Copilot coding agent set things up for you — coding agent works faster and does higher quality work when set up for your repo.

[Malcolmnixon]

@copilot The unit test names don't seem to match the TestMethod_Scenario_ExpectedBehavior convention. Please consider renaming the tests.

[Copilot]

@copilot The unit test names don't seem to match the TestMethod_Scenario_ExpectedBehavior convention. Please consider renaming the tests.

Renamed all test methods to follow the TestMethod_Scenario_ExpectedBehavior convention (commit 7d50285). All 27 tests continue to pass with the updated names.