List what changed
Add one row per changed file or function name and tick whether it already has a test — paste them in as fast as you can name them.
CURSOR / GITHUB COPILOT / REPLIT / LOVABLE COMPARISONS
Test Gap AI
List the files or functions an AI coding assistant changed and mark whether each currently has a test. Get an instant coverage score plus specific suggested test cases for every gap, based on what the name looks like it does.
- Updates live — no submit button
- Rules-based heuristic suggestions, no external calls
- All input stays in your browser
Results update automatically as you edit rows.
Coverage score 0/100
Coverage gaps & suggested tests
How it works
Gaps are flagged automatically
Every item without a test is flagged as a gap. Auth, payments, and database items without tests weigh the coverage score down more heavily, since they carry the most risk if untested.
Get specific suggested tests
Each gap gets 2-3 suggested test cases generated from pattern-matching the name — a file with "auth" in it gets suggested login/permission tests, one with "payment" gets suggested charge-failure and duplicate-charge tests, and so on.
Continue learning: How AI-generated code creates dependency risks · Can automated scanners secure AI-generated code?
Frequently asked questions
How does the tool decide what tests to suggest?
It matches the file or function name against a fixed set of naming patterns (auth, payments, database, API routes, forms, webhooks, uploads, notifications) and returns a curated set of test cases for the matched category. Anything that doesn't match a pattern gets general happy-path/edge-case/error-handling suggestions.
Does this actually run my tests or scan my repository?
No — this is a self-reported, structured-input tool. You tell it what changed and whether it has a test; it does not connect to your codebase, CI, or test runner.
Why do auth, payments, and database items lower the score more?
An untested change to authentication, payments, or the database schema has a wider and more expensive blast radius than an untested formatting helper, so the coverage score weights those gaps more heavily.
What if my file doesn't match any of the suggested categories?
It falls back to general test suggestions — happy path, boundary/edge case, and malformed-input handling — which still gives a useful starting point.
Should I trust the suggested tests exactly as written?
Treat them as a starting checklist, not a final spec. They are generated from the name alone, so adjust the specifics once you know what the code actually does.
How We Compare
| Feature | MVPHub | GitHub Copilot | Cursor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flags untested AI-generated changes by name | Included | Not included | Not included |
| Suggests specific test cases per item | Included | Limited | Limited |
| Instant and free, no external API calls | Included | Not included | Not included |
| Real code coverage measurement from a test run | Not included | Not included | Not included |
Cursor and Copilot can write tests when asked, but neither surfaces a standalone list of what still lacks coverage after a change. MVPHub gives a quick, structured pass to catch what got missed before merging.
Related tools
Embed this tool
Add this tool to your site with the canonical iframe below. It remains hosted and maintained by MVPHub.