I think it's easy enough to write go tests for this, it's probably best to have each feature/endpoint do it's own expected audit log testing.

One thing that makes testing audit logs generated by AGPL routes hard is that the audit logs are generated in the enterprise code. You can really only assert the inputs to the enterprise code unless you want to move the tests there as well.

Discussed with @coadler and the path forward here is to:

1. fix the above issues and any others we come across smoke-testing.
2. ensure that we assert the creation (rather than content) of logs for each action. We cannot test the diffs because we cannot easily test the enterprise code.

There is no way to automate audit log creation for new features, but I can write a quick how-to if that's helpful, @bpmct.

There is no way to automate audit log creation for new features, but I can write a quick how-to if that's helpful, @bpmct.

That would be helpful! We can ensure that incoming features are in the audit log during QA and rely on automated tests to ensure records remain accurate. Does that make sense to you @Kira-Pilot?

Yup, sounds good to me! @bpmct

@bpmct I am going to close this issue if that's alright with you as I think it has been completed!
Here is a guide on auditing new features for product/future devs.
Here is an epic of Audit issues.