How to manually test input validation with NestJS and class-validator

Question

TLNR: I was trying to test DTO validation in the controller spec instead of in e2e specs, which are precisely crafted for that. McDoniel's answer pointed me to the right direction.

---

I develop a NestJS entrypoint, looking like that:

@Post()
async doStuff(@Body() dto: MyDto): Promise<string> {
  // some code...
}

I use class-validator so that when my API receives a request, the payload is parsed and turned into a MyDto object, and validations present as annotations in MyDto class are performed. Note that MyDto has an array of nested object of class MySubDto. With the @ValidateNested and @Type annotations, the nested objects are also validated correctly.

This works great.

Now I want to write tests for the performed validations. In my.spec file, I write:

import { validate  } from 'class-validator';
// ...
it('should FAIL on invalid DTO', async () => {
  const dto = {
    //...
  };
  const errors = await validate( dto );
  expect(errors.length).not.toBe(0);
}

This fails because the validated dto object is not a MyDto. I can rewrite the test as such:

it('should FAIL on invalid DTO', async () => {
  const dto = new MyDto()
  dto.attribute1 = 1;
  dto.subDto = { 'name':'Vincent' };
  const errors = await validate( dto );
  expect(errors.length).not.toBe(0);
}

Validations are now properly made on the MyDto object, but not on my nested subDto object, which means I will have to instantiate aaaall objects of my Dto with according classes, which would be much inefficient. Also, instantiating classes means that TypeScript will raise errors if I voluntarily omits some required properties or indicate incorrect values.

So the question is:

How can I use NestJs built-in request body parser in my tests, so that I can write any JSON I want for dto, parse it as a MyDto object and validate it with class-validator validate function?

Any alternate better-practice ways to tests validations are welcome too!

Answer 1

To test input validation with the validation pipes, I think it is agreed that the best place to do this is in e2e tests rather than in unit tests, just make sure that you remember to register your pipes (if you normally use app.useGlobalPipes() instead of using dependency injection)

Answer 2

Although, we should test how our validation DTOs work with ValidationPipe , that's a form of integration or e2e tests. Unit tests are unit tests, right?. Every unit should be testable independently.

The DTOs in Nest.js are perfectly unit-tastable . It becomes necessary to unit-test the DTOs, when they contain complex regular expressions or sanitation logic.

---

Creating an object of the DTO for test

The request body parser in Nest.js that you are looking for is the class-transformer package. It has a function plainToInstance() to turn your literal or JSON object into an object of the specified type.In your example the specified type is the type of your DTO:

const myDtoObject = plainToInstance(MyDto, myBodyObject)

Here, myBodyObject is your plain object that you created for test, like:

const myBodyObject = { attribute1: 1, subDto: { name: 'Vincent' } }

---

Validating the object of the DTO in test

To the emulate validation of Nest.js, simply pass the myDtoObject to the validate() function of the class-validator package:

const errors = await validate(myDtoObject)

Also, if your DTO or SubDTO object is too big or too complex to create, you have the option to skip the remaining properties or subObjects like your subDto :

const errors = await validate(myDtoObject, { skipMissingProperties: true })

Now your test object could be without the subDto , like:

const myBodyObject = { attribute1: 1 }

---

Asserting the errors

Apart from asserting that the errors array is not empty, I also like to specify a custom error message for each validation in the DTO:

@IsPositive({ message: `Attribute1 must be a positive number.` })
readonly attribute1: number

One advantage of a custom error message is that we can write it in a user-friendly way instead of the generic messages created by the library. Another big advantage is that I can assert this error message in my tests. This way I can be sure that the errors array is not empty because it contains the error for this particular validation and not something else:

expect(stringified(errors)).toContain(`Attribute1 must be a positive number.`)

Here, stringified() is a simple utility function to convert the errors object to a JSON string, so we can search our error message in it:

export function stringified(errors: ValidationError[]): string {
  return JSON.stringify(errors)
}

---

Your final test code

Instead of the controller.spec.ts file, create a new file specific to your DTO, like my-dto.spec.ts for unit tests of your DTO. A DTO can have plenty of unit tests and they should not be mixed with the controller's tests:

it('should fail on invalid DTO', async () => {
  const myBodyObject = { attribute1: -1, subDto: { name: 'Vincent' } }
  const myDtoObject = plainToInstance(MyDto, myBodyObject)
  expect(errors.length).not.toBe(0)
  expect(stringified(errors)).toContain(`Attribute1 must be a positive number.`)
}

Notice how you don't have to assign the values to the properties one by one for creating the myDtoObject . In most cases, the properties of your DTOs should be marked readonly . So, you can't assign the values one by one. The plainToInstance() to the rescue!

---

That's it, You were almost there. unit testing your DTO. Good efforts! Hope that helps now.