Currently we have a few Selenium-based Integration tests in Refinery for Vis-Tool Launches (IGV, HiGlass), but these are slowing down our test suite over there/are quite flaky to run due to Selenium waiting and would be more appropriate in this repo.

With that being said, the UI tests are nice but maybe a bit overkill. It would be great if we could just specify a sample input.json along with a Vis-Tool and try to run a container with it through django-docker-engine.

Since we already have access to the Refinery code in our CI here, we could have a new repo structure here like:

├── LICENSE
├── README.md
├── ci_tests.py
└── tool-annotations
    ├── heatmap-scatterplot
        ├── heatmap-scatterplot.json
        ├── input.json
    ├── higlass
        ├── higlass.json
        ├── input.json
    ├── igv
        ├── igv.json
        ├── input.json
   ├── refinery-developer-tool
        ├── refinery-developer-tool.json
        ├── input.json

Where we would provide input.json(s) along with our Tool Annotations and attempt to:

• Create ToolDefinitions from these ToolAnnotations (we're doing this currently)
• Launch a container through django-docker-engine utilizing the provided input.json. This would need to satisfy the code in VisualizationTool.launch() which would mean that we'd need to create valid Nodes & FileStoreItems which could start to get tricky.
• Assert that we can get a 200 from each of the launched containers

EDIT: Thinking about this again, we could just have users provide the FILE_RELATIONSHIPS structure with urls pointing to reasonable test files that they could check into this repo as well (Could specify the raw.github.... versions). Then when we launch the Tool, we wouldn't have to worry about creating Refinery-specific objects.

Currently, nothing uses the provided file types. We should check that each tool is specified correctly, so that when refinery-platform/refinery-platform#2212 is done there are not spurious errors going to the user.

We can most likely remove the container_input_path keys from the annotations in this repo

The Refinery JSON Schema doesn't require it now, where it did at some point in the past.

We should be diligent to make sure that the underlying Tools aren't using the information anymore before we go ahead and remove.

Right now we are validating new ToolAnnotations against the latest Refinery application code, which is great, but we won't be able to ensure that these work with the latest release of Refinery.

Running the integration tests against develop & master would probably be a good idea

refinery-platform/refinery-platform#2261

• Revert changes from: #40

Tool Annotation Descriptions should state how to launch the tool through Refinery as well as have potential links to more verbose documentation