Curated library of 39 AI agent skills for Ruby on Rails development. Organized by category: planning, testing, code-quality, ddd, engines, infrastructure, api, patterns, context, orchestration, and workflows. Includes 5 callable workflow skills (rails-tdd-loop, rails-review-flow, rails-setup-flow, rails-quality-flow, rails-engines-flow) for complete development cycles. Covers code review, architecture, security, testing (RSpec), engines, service objects, DDD patterns, and TDD automation.
95
98%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
95%
1.20xAverage score across 35 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Use this skill when the task is to write, review, or clean up RSpec tests.
Core principle: Prefer behavioral confidence over implementation coupling. Good specs are readable, deterministic, and cheap to maintain.
| Aspect | Rule |
|---|---|
| Spec types | Model: domain logic; Request: HTTP endpoints (prefer over controller); Job: background processing; Service/PORO: no Rails helpers; System: critical E2E only (slow) |
| Assertions | Test behavior, not implementation |
| Factories | Minimal — only attributes needed; use traits for optional states; prefer build/build_stubbed over create |
| Mocking | Stub external boundaries, not internal code |
| Isolation | Each example independent; no shared mutable state |
| Naming | describe for class/method, context for scenario |
| Service specs | Required: describe '.call' and subject(:result) for the primary invocation |
let vs let! | Default to let; let! ONLY when object must exist before example runs |
| External service mocking | allow(ServiceClass).to receive(:method) — not instance_double; instance_double only for injected collaborators |
| Example names | Present tense: it 'returns the user', never it 'should ...'; NEVER contains the word "and" — split into separate examples |
aggregate_failures | Use when asserting multiple related items in one example |
When driving new behaviour with RSpec, follow this sequence:
| Change type | Start with |
|---|---|
| Pure domain logic | Model or PORO service spec |
| HTTP endpoint behaviour | Request spec |
| Background processing | Job spec |
| Cross-layer user journey | System spec (sparingly) |
Minimal factories only. Never rely on factory defaults for business logic — set explicitly or use traits. Avoid create when build/build_stubbed suffices.
RSpec.describe Invoices::MarkOverdue do
describe '.call' do
subject(:result) { described_class.call(invoice: invoice) }
context 'when the invoice is overdue and unpaid' do
let(:invoice) { create(:invoice, due_date: 2.days.ago, paid_at: nil) }
it 'marks the invoice overdue' do
expect { result }.to change { invoice.reload.overdue? }.from(false).to(true)
end
end
context 'when the invoice is already paid' do
let(:invoice) { create(:invoice, due_date: 2.days.ago, paid_at: 1.day.ago) }
it 'does not change the invoice' do
expect { result }.not_to change { invoice.reload.updated_at }
end
end
end
end→ Full examples: EXAMPLES.md | Copy-paste templates: assets/spec_templates.md
Use only when the same behavioural contract applies to multiple subjects without per-example let overrides. Avoid when each context needs different setup — that signals a wrong abstraction. → Example in EXAMPLES.md
The word "and" in an it / specify description means the example is asserting two behaviors. Split it. One behavior per example. Applies to every spec type — model, request, service, job, mailer, system.
# BAD — two assertions; if the first fails, the second never runs
it 'returns 201 and creates the record' do; end
it 'saves the order and sends the confirmation email' do; end
it 'updates the user and logs the change' do; end
# GOOD — one observable outcome per example
it 'returns 201' do; end
it 'creates the record' do; end
it 'saves the order' do; end
it 'sends the confirmation email' do; endSelf-check before finalizing any spec: scan every it '...' / it "..." / specify '...' string for the word and (case-insensitive, word-boundary). Every hit is a split — no exceptions for "convenience" examples like 'returns nil and does not raise'.
When asked to write or review RSpec specs, your output MUST satisfy each rule below. Each is graded independently — one violation drops the whole check.
app/foo/bar.rb → spec/foo/bar_spec.rb.# frozen_string_literal: true as the first line of every spec file.RSpec.describe uses the full constant path (RSpec.describe Module::Class do), not a string.describe '#method' / describe '.class_method' for each method under test.context 'when ...' / context 'with ...' for scenario variations — never use context to group methods.let for test data, let! ONLY when the object must exist before the action under test.let_it_be unless the project already depends on test-prof (check Gemfile.lock first).subject(:result) { ... } for service / PORO specs invoking .call.travel_to / freeze_time for any time-dependent assertion — never set past Time.now or stub Time.current directly.allow(SomeClient).to receive(:method)); ActiveRecord finders are NEVER mocked.| Cause | Fix |
|---|---|
| Time-dependent logic | freeze_time / travel_to; never set past dates as shortcut |
| State leakage | Each example sets up own state; avoid before(:all) |
| Async jobs | queue_adapter = :test + have_enqueued_job; never assert side-effects imperatively |
| External HTTP | WebMock / VCR; never allow real network in CI |
| DB state bleed | Transactional fixtures or DatabaseCleaner; never share let! across contexts |
| Race conditions | Explicit Capybara waits; avoid sleep |
| Imprecise assertions | change.from().to() over final state; exact values over be_truthy/be_falsey; never assert updated_at |
docs
evals
scenario-1
scenario-2
scenario-3
scenario-4
scenario-5
scenario-6
scenario-7
scenario-8
scenario-9
scenario-10
scenario-11
scenario-12
scenario-13
scenario-14
scenario-15
scenario-16
scenario-17
scenario-18
scenario-19
scenario-20
scenario-21
scenario-22
scenario-23
scenario-24
scenario-25
scenario-26
scenario-27
scenario-28
scenario-29
scenario-30
scenario-31
scenario-32
scenario-33
scenario-34
scenario-35
mcp_server
skills
api
api-rest-collection
rails-graphql-best-practices
code-quality
rails-architecture-review
rails-code-conventions
rails-code-review
rails-review-response
rails-security-review
rails-stack-conventions
assets
snippets
refactor-safely
context
rails-context-engineering
rails-project-onboarding
ddd
ddd-boundaries-review
ddd-rails-modeling
ddd-ubiquitous-language
engines
rails-engine-compatibility
rails-engine-docs
rails-engine-extraction
rails-engine-installers
rails-engine-release
rails-engine-reviewer
rails-engine-testing
infrastructure
rails-api-versioning
rails-background-jobs
rails-database-seeding
rails-frontend-hotwire
rails-migration-safety
rails-performance-optimization
orchestration
rails-skills-orchestrator
patterns
ruby-service-objects
strategy-factory-null-calculator
yard-documentation
planning
create-prd
generate-tasks
ticket-planning
testing
rails-bug-triage
rails-tdd-slices
rspec-best-practices
rspec-service-testing