solution

[Mitlosh]

No description provided.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Sorry, the pull request review was unsuccessful for the following reasons:

Warning

There are no files to review. Please make sure that you have added files to the pull request. Some files and directories may be ignored from the review or failed to load.
_{[CODE: NFR]}

Additional info:
Ignored files list:

• .github/workflows/test.yml-template
• package-lock.json
• package.json

If the issue is within your control, please address it.
The next review attempt will automatically launch in about 1 hour.
If you believe this is an error or need assistance, please contact the support team.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Review Summary

I am requesting changes because one core requirement from the task description is not yet fully met in your test suite. The tests cover the empty string, a valid isogram like 'playgrounds', non-isograms like 'look', and case-insensitive behavior with 'Adam', which is all good and shows your implementation is generally correct. However, the task explicitly requires an example for isIsogram('Oops') === false, and there is currently no test that asserts this behavior.

To fix this, add a Jest assertion such as expect(isIsogram('Oops')).toBe(false); in src/isIsogram.test.js with a clear, unique description (for example, it("should return false for 'Oops'", ...)). You can either place this in the existing case-insensitive test or create a separate test block just for 'Oops', as long as the description clearly states what is being checked. Once that example is covered, your solution will align with the full set of task requirements. Overall, your implementation and other tests look solid, so you’re very close—this is just about matching the specified examples precisely.

---

✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center¹. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨

Important

Fix the issues, commit the changes, and then re-request my review using the Re-request review button² in the Reviewers tab.

Tip

If you have any comments about this review, please leave a message in the Add a comment section below and mention me with the @mateacademy-ai-mentor tag³.
I will read your message during my next review of your pull request. Please do not reply directly to my comments, as that feature is not supported yet.

Caution

Do not close the pull request until the review is complete. Closing it early can lead to unexpected behavior and disrupt the review process.

Footnotes

1. Rate AI review example ↩

2. Re-request AI review example ↩

3. Add AI review comments example ↩

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The test suite is missing the required example isIsogram('Oops') === false. Add an assertion such as expect(isIsogram('Oops')).toBe(false); with a clear, unique test description (either inside the existing case-insensitive test or as a separate test). This is required by the task examples in the description .

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Review Summary

I am requesting changes because one explicit task requirement is not fully met yet: the example isIsogram('Oops') === false does not have its own clearly named test case. Right now, the expect(isIsogram('Oops')).toBe(false) assertion is nested inside the broader "should be case-insensitive" test in src/isIsogram.test.js, so if it fails, the output will not show a uniquely descriptive test name for this required example. The task specifically calls out that each example, and in particular 'Oops', should have a clear, unique test description, so this is considered a functional requirement rather than a style preference.

To fix this, add a standalone test like:

it("should return false for 'Oops'", () => {
  expect(isIsogram('Oops')).toBe(false);
});

You can keep your existing case-insensitivity test as is; just ensure the 'Oops' example is also covered by its own dedicated it(...) block. Once that is in place, your implementation and tests will satisfy the stated requirements, and everything else in your solution (implementation logic, other examples, and the CI workflow) already looks solid. This is a relatively small change, and you are very close—nice work on covering the rest of the edge cases thoroughly.

---

✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center¹. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨

Important

Fix the issues, commit the changes, and then re-request my review using the Re-request review button² in the Reviewers tab.

Tip

If you have any comments about this review, please leave a message in the Add a comment section below and mention me with the @mateacademy-ai-mentor tag³.
I will read your message during my next review of your pull request. Please do not reply directly to my comments, as that feature is not supported yet.

Caution

Do not close the pull request until the review is complete. Closing it early can lead to unexpected behavior and disrupt the review process.

Footnotes

1. Rate AI review example ↩

2. Re-request AI review example ↩

3. Add AI review comments example ↩

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The assertion for "Oops" is present but lives inside the broader "should be case-insensitive" test; the task requires the isIsogram('Oops') === false example to have a clear, unique description. Consider adding a dedicated test with its own description, for example:

it("should return false for 'Oops'", () => {
  expect(isIsogram('Oops')).toBe(false);
});

This will make the example explicit in the test output and satisfy the requirement.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Review Summary

I am approving your solution; the isIsogram implementation and its tests correctly handle all required cases, including playgrounds, look, Adam, the empty string, and the standalone isIsogram('Oops') === false, with proper case-insensitive logic. Your test descriptions are clear and specific, and the GitHub Actions workflow is set up correctly to install dependencies and run npm test on pull requests.

Because this is an educational setting, I’ll also point out one improvement opportunity: make sure your package.json has a test script like "test": "jest" and that Jest is listed in devDependencies, otherwise the CI workflow that runs npm test could fail even though your code is correct. Another minor, optional improvement is to keep your test style consistent (either always it or always test) and, if you’d like, add an extra case or two with non-consecutive mixed-case duplicates to further reinforce the isogram logic. Overall, you met the core requirements very well—nice work building a clean, readable solution and a focused test suite.

---

✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center¹. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨

Footnotes

1. Rate AI review example ↩