test(validation): replace stale provider ID in shouldSkipResponsesProbe test

[ColinM-sys]

The fixture on line 289 used `"anthropic-api"` which does not exist
anywhere in the codebase as a provider ID. The real Anthropic provider
ID used throughout `inference-config.ts`, `onboard.ts`, and
`inference-health.ts` is `"anthropic-prod"`.

The test still passed because `shouldSkipResponsesProbe` returns
`false` for any unrecognised string, so the assertion was never
actually exercising the Anthropic provider path — it was passing
vacuously.

Signed-off-by: ColinM-sys cmcdonough@50words.com

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Updated test coverage for provider validation to ensure proper validation across different provider configurations.

[copy-pr-bot]

This pull request requires additional validation before any workflows can run on NVIDIA's runners.

Pull request vetters can view their responsibilities here.

Contributors can view more details about this message here.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: 48050bdb-671f-436a-9dd2-02641937c334

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6f7f0c6 and b5d3171.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• src/lib/validation.test.ts

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

A test case for the shouldSkipResponsesProbe function is updated to verify behavior with the provider string "anthropic-prod" instead of "anthropic-api", maintaining the same expected result.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Test Provider String Update src/lib/validation.test.ts	Updated test input for "other providers" case from "anthropic-api" to "anthropic-prod" while preserving expected behavior validation.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Poem

🐰 A single string does twist and turn,
From "anthropic-api" we learn,
To "anthropic-prod" it now does go,
The test still passes—on we flow!
One line changed, the logic stays true,
Testing tweaks in all we do! 🧪✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: replacing a stale provider ID in a test, matching the actual content of the PR.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[wscurran]

✨ Thanks for submitting this pull request that proposes a way to update the test coverage for provider validation.