test: Search PHPUnit tests

[Kallyan01]

What

Added Search Module PHPUnit test cases.

Why

Improves development workflow by enabling faster and more reliable validation of REST functionality, reducing repetitive manual testing efforts.

Related Issue(s):

• https://github.com/rtCamp/OnePress/issues/71

How

AI Disclosure

Hybrid approach = Written by Me + Copilot (Claude Opus 4.6, GPT 5.3) + Audited by me

Testing Instructions

npm run wp-env:test -- start --xdebug=coverage    

npm run test:php -- tests/php/Unit/Modules/Search

Screenshots

Additional Info

Checklist

• I have read the Contribution Guidelines.
• I have read the Development Guidelines.
• I have added necessary tests to cover my changes.
• I have updated the project documentation as needed.
• My code has detailed inline documentation.
• My code is tested to the best of my abilities.
• My code passes all lints, tests, and checks.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR adds PHPUnit unit tests for the Search module’s WordPress integration points and for the Algolia Index wrapper, helping validate hook registration and several “remote post” mapping behaviors.

Changes:

• Add SearchTest covering hook registration and selected behaviors for permalinks, author fields, term links, and rendered block rewriting.
• Add IndexTest covering error returns when prerequisites are missing and verifying Index::get_index() caching behavior.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 5 comments.

File	Description
tests/php/Unit/Modules/Search/SearchTest.php	Introduces unit tests for OneSearch\Modules\Search\Search behaviors (hooks, mapping, block output).
tests/php/Unit/Modules/Search/IndexTest.php	Introduces unit tests for OneSearch\Modules\Search\Index error handling and caching.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

[sabbir1991]

Please review the coverage HTML again and check the functions are fully covered which test you have written

[justlevine]

Great first pass! 🙌 Especially a fan of daab8dc before I even asked ;-)

Just some minor cleanup and trying to cover the few areas the coverage report missed. We'll be refactoring soon though, so if something I asked for isn't easily testable, lmk and maybe we'll skip it.

[justlevine]

I think we need one more successful index_all_posts with 101 posts, so it triggers ::generate_post_batches(), but I'm on the fence.

@Kallyan01 thoughts?

[Kallyan01]

Added the case, I think it's a good testcase to add.

[justlevine]

These look good!

I'm wondering if it's worth it for you to do one more pass through the coverage report, and see if there's some more low-hanging you can catch here, e.g. from a brand site, w. author info, composite scores, > 100 posts, etc. Still outcome based, nothing that requires elaborate stubbing.

Alternatively, we can skip them now add the coverage to the areas that we refactor, the missing areas aren't particularly important for back-compat, just catching unintentional breaks...

@Kallyan01 can you take a look at the report and let me know which - if any - you think are worth doing now vs later?

[Kallyan01]

These look good!

I'm wondering if it's worth it for you to do one more pass through the coverage report, and see if there's some more low-hanging you can catch here, e.g. from a brand site, w. author info, composite scores, > 100 posts, etc. Still outcome based, nothing that requires elaborate stubbing.

Alternatively, we can skip them now add the coverage to the areas that we refactor, the missing areas aren't particularly important for back-compat, just catching unintentional breaks...

@Kallyan01 can you take a look at the report and let me know which - if any - you think are worth doing now vs later?

Sure, I've started looking into it, I'll let you know if I find something.