This version is still in development and is not considered stable yet. For the latest stable version, please use spring-cloud-contract 4.1.5!

Contract DSL

Spring Cloud Contract supports DSLs written in the following languages:

Groovy
YAML
Java
Kotlin

Spring Cloud Contract supports defining multiple contracts in a single file (In Groovy return a list instead of a single contract).

The following example shows a contract definition:

Groovy

org.springframework.cloud.contract.spec.Contract.make {
	request {
		method 'PUT'
		url '/api/12'
		headers {
			header 'Content-Type': 'application/vnd.org.springframework.cloud.contract.verifier.twitter-places-analyzer.v1+json'
		}
		body '''\
	[{
		"created_at": "Sat Jul 26 09:38:57 +0000 2014",
		"id": 492967299297845248,
		"id_str": "492967299297845248",
		"text": "Gonna see you at Warsaw",
		"place":
		{
			"attributes":{},
			"bounding_box":
			{
				"coordinates":
					[[
						[-77.119759,38.791645],
						[-76.909393,38.791645],
						[-76.909393,38.995548],
						[-77.119759,38.995548]
					]],
				"type":"Polygon"
			},
			"country":"United States",
			"country_code":"US",
			"full_name":"Washington, DC",
			"id":"01fbe706f872cb32",
			"name":"Washington",
			"place_type":"city",
			"url": "https://api.twitter.com/1/geo/id/01fbe706f872cb32.json"
		}
	}]
'''
	}
	response {
		status OK()
	}
}

YAML

description: Some description
name: some name
priority: 8
ignored: true
request:
  url: /foo
  queryParameters:
    a: b
    b: c
  method: PUT
  headers:
    foo: bar
    fooReq: baz
  body:
    foo: bar
  matchers:
    body:
      - path: $.foo
        type: by_regex
        value: bar
    headers:
      - key: foo
        regex: bar
response:
  status: 200
  headers:
    foo2: bar
    foo3: foo33
    fooRes: baz
  body:
    foo2: bar
    foo3: baz
    nullValue: null
  matchers:
    body:
      - path: $.foo2
        type: by_regex
        value: bar
      - path: $.foo3
        type: by_command
        value: executeMe($it)
      - path: $.nullValue
        type: by_null
        value: null
    headers:
      - key: foo2
        regex: bar
      - key: foo3
        command: andMeToo($it)

Java

import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.function.Supplier;

import org.springframework.cloud.contract.spec.Contract;
import org.springframework.cloud.contract.verifier.util.ContractVerifierUtil;

class contract_rest implements Supplier<Collection<Contract>> {

	@Override
	public Collection<Contract> get() {
		return Collections.singletonList(Contract.make(c -> {
			c.description("Some description");
			c.name("some name");
			c.priority(8);
			c.ignored();
			c.request(r -> {
				r.url("/foo", u -> {
					u.queryParameters(q -> {
						q.parameter("a", "b");
						q.parameter("b", "c");
					});
				});
				r.method(r.PUT());
				r.headers(h -> {
					h.header("foo", r.value(r.client(r.regex("bar")), r.server("bar")));
					h.header("fooReq", "baz");
				});
				r.body(ContractVerifierUtil.map().entry("foo", "bar"));
				r.bodyMatchers(m -> {
					m.jsonPath("$.foo", m.byRegex("bar"));
				});
			});
			c.response(r -> {
				r.fixedDelayMilliseconds(1000);
				r.status(r.OK());
				r.headers(h -> {
					h.header("foo2", r.value(r.server(r.regex("bar")), r.client("bar")));
					h.header("foo3", r.value(r.server(r.execute("andMeToo($it)")), r.client("foo33")));
					h.header("fooRes", "baz");
				});
				r.body(ContractVerifierUtil.map().entry("foo2", "bar").entry("foo3", "baz").entry("nullValue", null));
				r.bodyMatchers(m -> {
					m.jsonPath("$.foo2", m.byRegex("bar"));
					m.jsonPath("$.foo3", m.byCommand("executeMe($it)"));
					m.jsonPath("$.nullValue", m.byNull());
				});
			});
		}));
	}

}

Kotlin

import org.springframework.cloud.contract.spec.ContractDsl.Companion.contract
import org.springframework.cloud.contract.spec.withQueryParameters

contract {
	name = "some name"
	description = "Some description"
	priority = 8
	ignored = true
	request {
		url = url("/foo") withQueryParameters  {
			parameter("a", "b")
			parameter("b", "c")
		}
		method = PUT
		headers {
			header("foo", value(client(regex("bar")), server("bar")))
			header("fooReq", "baz")
		}
		body = body(mapOf("foo" to "bar"))
		bodyMatchers {
			jsonPath("$.foo", byRegex("bar"))
		}
	}
	response {
		delay = fixedMilliseconds(1000)
		status = OK
		headers {
			header("foo2", value(server(regex("bar")), client("bar")))
			header("foo3", value(server(execute("andMeToo(\$it)")), client("foo33")))
			header("fooRes", "baz")
		}
		body = body(mapOf(
				"foo" to "bar",
				"foo3" to "baz",
				"nullValue" to null
		))
		bodyMatchers {
			jsonPath("$.foo2", byRegex("bar"))
			jsonPath("$.foo3", byCommand("executeMe(\$it)"))
			jsonPath("$.nullValue", byNull)
		}
	}
}

You can compile contracts to stubs mapping by using the following standalone Maven command:

mvn org.springframework.cloud:spring-cloud-contract-maven-plugin:convert

Contract DSL in Groovy

If you are not familiar with Groovy, do not worry. You can use Java syntax in the Groovy DSL files as well.

If you decide to write the contract in Groovy, do not be alarmed if you have not used Groovy before. Knowledge of the language is not really needed, as the Contract DSL uses only a tiny subset of it (only literals, method calls, and closures). Also, the DSL is statically typed, to make it programmer-readable without any knowledge of the DSL itself.

Remember that, inside the Groovy contract file, you have to provide the fully qualified name to the Contract class and make static imports, such as org.springframework.cloud.spec.Contract.make { … }. You can also provide an import to the Contract class (import org.springframework.cloud.spec.Contract) and then call Contract.make { … }.

Contract DSL in Java

To write a contract definition in Java, you need to create a class that implements either the Supplier<Contract> interface (for a single contract) or Supplier<Collection<Contract>> (for multiple contracts).

You can also write the contract definitions under src/test/java (for example, src/test/java/contracts) so that you do not have to modify the classpath of your project. In this case, you have to provide a new location of contract definitions to your Spring Cloud Contract plugin.

The following example (in both Maven and Gradle) has the contract definitions under src/test/java:

Maven

<plugin>
    <groupId>org.springframework.cloud</groupId>
    <artifactId>spring-cloud-contract-maven-plugin</artifactId>
    <version>${spring-cloud-contract.version}</version>
    <extensions>true</extensions>
    <configuration>
        <contractsDirectory>src/test/java/contracts</contractsDirectory>
    </configuration>
</plugin>

Gradle

contracts {
	contractsDslDir = new File(project.rootDir, "src/test/java/contracts")
}

Contract DSL in Kotlin

To get started with writing contracts in Kotlin, you need to start with a (newly created) Kotlin Script file (.kts). As with the Java DSL, you can put your contracts in any directory of your choice. By default, the Maven plugin will look at the src/test/resources/contracts directory and Gradle plugin will look at the src/contractTest/resources/contracts directory.

Since 3.0.0, the Gradle plugin will also look at the legacy directory src/test/resources/contracts for migration purposes. When contracts are found in this directory, a warning will be logged during your build.

You need to explicitly pass the spring-cloud-contract-spec-kotlin dependency to your project plugin setup. The following example (in both Maven and Gradle) shows how to do so:

Maven

<plugin>
    <groupId>org.springframework.cloud</groupId>
    <artifactId>spring-cloud-contract-maven-plugin</artifactId>
    <version>${spring-cloud-contract.version}</version>
    <extensions>true</extensions>
    <configuration>
        <!-- some config -->
    </configuration>
    <dependencies>
        <dependency>
            <groupId>org.springframework.cloud</groupId>
            <artifactId>spring-cloud-contract-spec-kotlin</artifactId>
            <version>${spring-cloud-contract.version}</version>
        </dependency>
    </dependencies>
</plugin>

<dependencies>
        <!-- Remember to add this for the DSL support in the IDE and on the consumer side -->
        <dependency>
            <groupId>org.springframework.cloud</groupId>
            <artifactId>spring-cloud-contract-spec-kotlin</artifactId>
            <scope>test</scope>
        </dependency>
</dependencies>

Gradle

buildscript {
    repositories {
        // ...
    }
	dependencies {
		classpath "org.springframework.cloud:spring-cloud-contract-gradle-plugin:$\{scContractVersion}"
	}
}

dependencies {
    // ...

    // Remember to add this for the DSL support in the IDE and on the consumer side
    testImplementation "org.springframework.cloud:spring-cloud-contract-spec-kotlin"
    // Kotlin versions are very particular down to the patch version. The <kotlin_version> needs to be the same as you have imported for your project.
    testImplementation "org.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-scripting-compiler-embeddable:<kotlin_version>"
}

Remember that, inside the Kotlin Script file, you have to provide the fully qualified name to the ContractDSL class. Generally you would use its contract function as follows: org.springframework.cloud.contract.spec.ContractDsl.contract { … }. You can also provide an import to the contract function (import org.springframework.cloud.contract.spec.ContractDsl.Companion.contract) and then call contract { … }.

Contract DSL in YAML

To see a schema of a YAML contract, visit the YML Schema page.

Limitations

The support for verifying the size of JSON arrays is experimental. If you want to turn it on, set the value of the following system property to true: spring.cloud.contract.verifier.assert.size. By default, this feature is set to false. You can also set the assertJsonSize property in the plugin configuration.

Because JSON structure can have any form, it can be impossible to parse it properly when using the Groovy DSL and the value(consumer(…), producer(…)) notation in GString. That is why you should use the Groovy Map notation.

Multiple Contracts in One File

You can define multiple contracts in one file. Such a contract might resemble the following example:

Groovy

import org.springframework.cloud.contract.spec.Contract

[
	Contract.make {
		name("should post a user")
		request {
			method 'POST'
			url('/users/1')
		}
		response {
			status OK()
		}
	},
	Contract.make {
		request {
			method 'POST'
			url('/users/2')
		}
		response {
			status OK()
		}
	}
]

YAML

---
name: should post a user
request:
  method: POST
  url: /users/1
response:
  status: 200
---
request:
  method: POST
  url: /users/2
response:
  status: 200
---
request:
  method: POST
  url: /users/3
response:
  status: 200

Java

class contract implements Supplier<Collection<Contract>> {

	@Override
	public Collection<Contract> get() {
		return Arrays.asList(
            Contract.make(c -> {
            	c.name("should post a user");
                // ...
            }), Contract.make(c -> {
                // ...
            }), Contract.make(c -> {
                // ...
            })
		);
	}

}

Kotlin

import org.springframework.cloud.contract.spec.ContractDsl.Companion.contract

arrayOf(
    contract {
        name("should post a user")
        // ...
    },
    contract {
        // ...
    },
    contract {
        // ...
    }
}

In the preceding example, one contract has the name field and the other does not. This leads to generation of two tests that look like the following:

import com.example.TestBase;
import com.jayway.jsonpath.DocumentContext;
import com.jayway.jsonpath.JsonPath;
import com.jayway.restassured.module.mockmvc.specification.MockMvcRequestSpecification;
import com.jayway.restassured.response.ResponseOptions;
import org.junit.Test;

import static com.jayway.restassured.module.mockmvc.RestAssuredMockMvc.*;
import static com.toomuchcoding.jsonassert.JsonAssertion.assertThatJson;
import static org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat;

public class V1Test extends TestBase {

	@Test
	public void validate_should_post_a_user() throws Exception {
		// given:
			MockMvcRequestSpecification request = given();

		// when:
			ResponseOptions response = given().spec(request)
					.post("/users/1");

		// then:
			assertThat(response.statusCode()).isEqualTo(200);
	}

	@Test
	public void validate_withList_1() throws Exception {
		// given:
			MockMvcRequestSpecification request = given();

		// when:
			ResponseOptions response = given().spec(request)
					.post("/users/2");

		// then:
			assertThat(response.statusCode()).isEqualTo(200);
	}

}

Notice that, for the contract that has the name field, the generated test method is named validate_should_post_a_user. The one that does not have the name field is called validate_withList_1. It corresponds to the name of the file WithList.groovy and the index of the contract in the list.

The generated stubs are shown in the following example:

should post a user.json
1_WithList.json

The first file got the name parameter from the contract. The second got the name of the contract file (WithList.groovy) prefixed with the index (in this case, the contract had an index of 1 in the list of contracts in the file).

It is much better to name your contracts, because doing so makes your tests far more meaningful.

Stateful Contracts

Stateful contracts (also known as scenarios) are contract definitions that should be read in order. This might be useful in the following situations:

You want to invoke the contract in a precisely defined order, since you use Spring Cloud Contract to test your stateful application.

We really discourage you from doing that, since contract tests should be stateless.

You want the same endpoint to return different results for the same request.

To create stateful contracts (or scenarios), you need to use the proper naming convention while creating your contracts. The convention requires including an order number followed by an underscore. This works regardless of whether you work with YAML or Groovy. The following listing shows an example:

my_contracts_dir\
  scenario1\
    1_login.groovy
    2_showCart.groovy
    3_logout.groovy

Such a tree causes Spring Cloud Contract Verifier to generate WireMock’s scenario with a name of scenario1 and the three following steps:

login, marked as Started pointing to…
showCart, marked as Step1 pointing to…
logout, marked as Step2 (which closes the scenario).

You can find more details about WireMock scenarios at https://wiremock.org/docs/stateful-behaviour/.