Fixes #991 – Removes unnecessary and broken version check that keeps dbt test description metadata from being captured

[jdglaser]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Consistent test description extraction: descriptions are now captured reliably from test metadata regardless of tooling version, preserving existing fallback behavior when no description is present.

[github-actions]

👋 @jdglaser
Thank you for raising your pull request.
Please make sure to add tests and document all user-facing changes.
You can do this by editing the docs files in the elementary repository.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: e9fc0bd1-c09b-4c04-a465-e08b6173fcf0

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e0aae97 and 5d12f7e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• macros/edr/dbt_artifacts/upload_dbt_tests.sql

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The flatten_test macro now always reads node_dict.get("description") (no dbt version guard). If absent, it still falls back to meta.description (popped), then default_description, then none.

Changes

Description Field Logic

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Use node_dict description macros/edr/dbt_artifacts/upload_dbt_tests.sql	Removed version-conditional logic; flatten_test unconditionally considers node_dict.get("description") before falling back to meta.description, default_description, or none.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Poem

🐰 I hopped through code with gentle cheer,
A version check I left out here,
Now descriptions flow from node to test,
Simple steps make parsing best,
A tidy hop — the logic's clear.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: removing a broken version check that was preventing dbt test descriptions from being captured, directly addressing issue #991.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[elazarlachkar]

Hi @jdglaser!
Thanks for the contribution. Could you update your branch from elementary-data:master, so the CI is up to date?

[jdglaser]

Hi @jdglaser! Thanks for the contribution. Could you update your branch from elementary-data:master, so the CI is up to date?

@elazarlachkar Done!

[elazarlachkar]

Thanks @jdglaser!
It will be part of the new release coming out in the next few days 🚀