optimizely-test
Wraps Optimizely Feature Experimentation SDK testing patterns - client init from a fixture datafile (offline-friendly), the decide / decideAll v5 API, forced-decisions for per-test arm pinning (fixing which variation a user gets), OptimizelyUserContext + activate/track events, assignment-integrity (deterministic bucketing) tests. Use when writing A/B tests or feature-flag tests for Optimizely-instrumented application code. For another experimentation SDK use the matching harness - statsig-test, vwo-test, amplitude-experiment-test, or split-io-test; for experiment DESIGN gates not SDK code use ab-test-validity-checklist.
Install with skills.sh (any agent)
npx skills add testland/qa --skill optimizely-testoptimizely-test
Overview
Optimizely Feature Experimentation (Optimizely Full Stack / Optimizely X) uses a datafile - a JSON blob describing all flags, experiments, and audiences - that the SDK fetches and evaluates locally. Per docs.developers.optimizely.com/feature-experimentation/docs/python-sdk (opens in new window), the SDK supports datafile-based testing: load a fixture datafile in tests, no network call.
The current API surface is decide (single flag) / decideAll (all flags) per the v5 SDK.
When to use
How to use
Authoring
Install
pip install optimizely-sdk # Python
npm install --save-dev @optimizely/optimizely-sdkDatafile-based initialization
Per Optimizely docs, the datafile path is the canonical offline approach:
import json
from optimizely import optimizely
# Load a checked-in datafile fixture
with open("tests/fixtures/optimizely-datafile.json") as f:
datafile = json.load(f)
client = optimizely.Optimizely(json.dumps(datafile))The datafile is downloadable from the Optimizely UI or via the Optimizely API; commit a version-specific copy to the repo for deterministic tests.
Create a user context
def test_get_decision_for_user():
user = client.create_user_context("user-1", {"plan": "premium"})
decision = user.decide("new_checkout_flow")
assert decision.enabled is True
assert decision.variation_key == "treatment_a"Forced decisions for per-test pinning
from optimizely.optimizely_user_context import OptimizelyDecisionContext
def test_force_user_to_treatment():
user = client.create_user_context("user-1")
context = OptimizelyDecisionContext(flag_key="new_checkout_flow", rule_key=None)
user.set_forced_decision(context, OptimizelyForcedDecision(variation_key="treatment_a"))
decision = user.decide("new_checkout_flow")
assert decision.variation_key == "treatment_a"Extended recipes - assignment-integrity and event-tracking tests, the pytest run command, and CI integration yaml - are in references/optimizely-recipes.md.
Worked example
The team ships a new_checkout_flow flag with a treatment_a variation, and QA needs a deterministic test that a premium-plan user is routed into the treatment. Follow the How-to-use steps: export the fixture, init offline, create the {"plan": "premium"} context, assert decide("new_checkout_flow") returns enabled is True / variation_key == "treatment_a", then pin the arm with set_forced_decision for the variant-specific path.
Result: a deterministic pass/fail on the checkout-routing logic with no network round-trip and no SDK key - the fixture drives the whole decision.
Anti-patterns
| Anti-pattern | Why it fails | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Tests with live SDK key | Production data polluted; rate-limited | Use datafile fixture |
| Datafile not version-controlled | Tests flake when prod config changes | Commit the fixture |
| Forced decisions leak across tests | Cross-test pollution | Per-test user context; reset before assertion |
Skipping client.shutdown / network listener cleanup | Goroutine / handle leak | Always cleanup |
| Asserting on variation IDs not keys | IDs change per environment | Use variation_key |
| Manual event tracking in tests vs notification listener | Misses platform-emitted events | Use the listener |
| Tests rely on real decide-network roundtrip | Slow; non-deterministic | Datafile + offline |
Limitations
References
optimizely-test extended recipes
View source (opens in new window)optimizely-test extended recipes
Deeper test recipes for the optimizely-test skill. The SKILL.md spine covers install, datafile init, user context + decide, and forced decisions; this file holds the assignment-integrity and event-tracking tests plus the run/CI wiring.
Assignment integrity
Same user id must resolve to the same variation, and decide_all must return a stable key set across calls.
def test_assignment_deterministic():
user_a1 = client.create_user_context("user-1")
user_a2 = client.create_user_context("user-1")
d1 = user_a1.decide("flag-x")
d2 = user_a2.decide("flag-x")
assert d1.variation_key == d2.variation_key
def test_decide_all_returns_consistent_set():
user = client.create_user_context("user-1")
decisions_1 = user.decide_all()
decisions_2 = user.decide_all()
assert decisions_1.keys() == decisions_2.keys()Event tracking
Assert conversion events via the notification listener rather than inspecting network calls.
def test_conversion_event_emitted():
captured_events = []
# Optimizely supports a notification listener
client.notification_center.add_notification_listener(
notification_type="TRACK", notification_callback=lambda *args: captured_events.append(args)
)
user = client.create_user_context("user-1")
user.track_event("checkout_completed")
assert len(captured_events) == 1Running
pytest tests/optimizely/CI integration
jobs:
optimizely-tests:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v5
- uses: actions/setup-python@v5
- run: pip install -e ".[test]"
- run: pytest tests/optimizely/Datafile lives in the repo; no SDK key needed for tests.
Related skills
ab-test-validity-checklist
Workflow skill that builds an A/B-test validity checklist from an experiment proposal, walking the canonical design-correctness gates - pre-registered OEC/power/guardrails, randomization unit + SRM check, assignment integrity, telemetry, peeking discipline, novelty/primacy, post-experiment SRM re-check - into a per-experiment checklist + sign-off form. Use when launching, auditing, or governing an experiment. For pitfall mechanics use guardrail-metrics-reference or peeking-problem-reference; to read an already-valid result use experiment-results-interpreter; for per-SDK harness tests use optimizely-test or statsig-test - this gates DESIGN, not SDK code.
amplitude-experiment-test
Wraps Amplitude Experiment SDK testing patterns: client initialization with API key (or a bootstrapped local flag config for offline tests), the fetch / variant API, exposure-event suppression in tests, and assignment-integrity tests. Use when writing tests for code that uses Amplitude Experiment for A/B testing or flag management.
experiment-results-interpreter
Interprets the results of a valid online controlled experiment, one whose harness, SRM, and telemetry have already been confirmed. Covers the distinction between practical and statistical significance, reading confidence intervals instead of binary p-values, novelty and primacy week-over-week decay that causes post-ship reversion, interaction effects from concurrent experiments, Simpson's paradox in segmented results, and the ordered guardrail-check sequence required before a ship decision. Use when a data scientist or PM is ready to draw conclusions from an experiment whose telemetry and randomisation have already passed the ab-test-validity-checklist. Distinct from ab-test-validity-checklist (harness setup and SRM detection) and from interaction-effect overlap auditing during experiment design.
guardrail-metrics-reference
Pure-reference catalog of guardrail-metric methodology for online controlled experiments. Defines guardrail metrics (metrics that must NOT degrade for an experiment to ship, even if the primary metric improves), the standard guardrail set (latency / errors / engagement / opt-out), the relationship to OEC (Overall Evaluation Criterion) per Kohavi et al., and pre-commitment of the metric set. The quantitative evaluation mechanics (per-metric alert/block thresholds, Bonferroni / Benjamini-Hochberg multiple-comparison correction) live in references/. Use when designing the metric set for a new experiment, auditing existing experiment configs, or reviewing experiment results before ship-decisions.
peeking-problem-reference
Pure-reference catalog of the peeking problem in online A/B testing. Defines the problem (repeatedly looking at experiment results inflates the false-positive rate above the declared alpha because each look is a separate test), the canonical mitigations (fixed-horizon test with pre-declared sample size; sequential testing with alpha-spending functions e.g., O'Brien-Fleming, Pocock; always-valid inference / mSPRT per Johari et al.), and the policy choices (data-peek schedule, stop-early thresholds, decision-time guard rails). Use when designing an experimentation platform's stop-early policy or auditing why a result was declared significant.
split-io-test
Wraps Split.io (Harness FME) SDK testing patterns: hermetic localhost/offline mode with an in-memory features map (JavaScript/browser) or a YAML fixture file (Node.js server-side), getTreatment and getTreatmentWithConfig evaluation, the SDK_READY event and whenReady() promise, impression listener verification, sync.impressionsMode configuration, and CI setup. Use when writing tests for application code instrumented with the Split.io or Harness Feature Management & Experimentation SDK.
statsig-test
Wraps Statsig SDK testing patterns - server-side statsig.initialize with an API key, gate / experiment / dynamic-config evaluation (checkGate, getExperiment, getConfig), local-evaluation offline mode, overrideGate / overrideConfig to force a user into an arm, assignment-integrity tests. Use when writing tests for Statsig-instrumented application code. For another experimentation SDK use the matching harness - optimizely-test, vwo-test, amplitude-experiment-test, or split-io-test; for experiment DESIGN gates not SDK code use ab-test-validity-checklist.
vwo-test
Wraps VWO (Visual Website Optimizer) SDK testing patterns: SDK initialization with the settings file (offline-capable), `getFeatureVariableValue` and `activate` API, force-bucketing for per-test assignment, and assignment-integrity tests against the bucketing algorithm. Use when writing tests for VWO-instrumented application code.