Outputting results embedded in the TestScript Description seems excessive. If the results thus written are preventing the TestScript Description from being reused without an edit to remove them, then, the architecture is silly.
Output specifications belong in the Description. The typical test pattern I've seen all my life is that the test has a name, that name is included in the output to identify what the test does. An individual test result should identify what was done, what was expected, what was actually found. The test name usually suffices for what was done, but the expected value, accepted range and actual value are good things to see in the output.
If there's doubt or uncertainty that the expected setup from the Description results in the right objects, a very verbose output mode might cause the Abstract Syntax Tree to be written out to the output. Pause-on-fail or a single step mode that pauses at the point the pass/fail evaluation is made can freeze the system at the moment of decision, and allow the developer or another developer or test maintainer, etc, to look around and be sure the setup from the Description has been correctly assembled.
Reproducing the Description, verbatum, in the output, saves a putative user from having to open an edit/display window for the Description as well as the Output. I sense good will, but unexpressed desires.
Good luck, Bill Abbott
