Coverage testing is a safety net of your application.

Any changes in the underlining libraries or your own classes should be captured by the unit tests.

It doesn't make sense to cover getters/setters as their implementation is rarely changed. Not covering getters/setters may significantly low your unit-test coverage. I don't think it's a problem.

@pmolchanov2002 You're right. But the question is the % of the coverage testing since there is none in the repo documentation (README.md) that states how many % must be covered by the coverage testing.