Write and maintain Behavior-Driven Development tests with Gherkin and Cucumber. Use when defining acceptance scenarios, writing feature files, implementing step definitions, running Three Amigos sessions, or diagnosing BDD test quality issues. Keywords: bdd, gherkin, cucumber, given when then, feature files, step definitions, acceptance criteria, three amigos, example mapping.
Does it follow best practices?
Evaluation — 96%
↑ 1.04xAgent success when using this tile
Validation for skill structure
Feature file creation and business language
Business language usage
93%
93%
Non-developer readability
93%
93%
Observable behavior focus
87%
93%
Given/When/Then structure
80%
100%
Avoids implementation details
87%
93%
Specific observable outcomes
90%
80%
Single behavior focus
80%
90%
Deterministic scenarios
80%
90%
With context: $0.5932 · 6m 50s · 25 turns · 21 in / 6,849 out tokens
Cucumber execution and reporting
Basic cucumber execution
100%
100%
Dry-run validation
100%
100%
Tag-based filtering
80%
100%
JSON report generation
100%
100%
Multiple execution methods
100%
100%
Proper file paths
100%
80%
Exit code awareness
80%
100%
Report file organization
100%
100%
With context: $0.5143 · 2m 50s · 23 turns · 369 in / 6,046 out tokens
Step definition implementation
Business language mapping
100%
100%
Avoids implementation details
90%
90%
Maintains scenario meaning
93%
93%
Proper Cucumber syntax
100%
100%
Step reusability
73%
80%
Abstraction layer
67%
87%
No brittle dependencies
90%
90%
With context: $0.8657 · 4m · 35 turns · 2,250 in / 10,436 out tokens
Scenario independence and structure
Given/When/Then structure
93%
100%
Scenario independence
85%
100%
No cross-scenario coupling
90%
100%
Deterministic execution
80%
100%
Self-contained setup
87%
100%
Single behavior focus
80%
100%
Cleanup consideration
100%
100%
With context: $0.6997 · 4m 35s · 31 turns · 376 in / 8,562 out tokens
Three Amigos process and anti-patterns
Three Amigos collaboration
90%
100%
Avoids vague outcomes
95%
95%
Observable behavior specification
87%
93%
Stakeholder alignment evidence
93%
100%
Specific examples over abstractions
93%
100%
Anti-pattern avoidance
90%
100%
Business language consistency
100%
100%
With context: $0.7398 · 3m 29s · 28 turns · 133 in / 9,626 out tokens
BDD scope boundaries and when not to use BDD
Identifies internal implementation exclusions
100%
100%
Stakeholder-facing behavior identification
100%
100%
Clear scope boundaries
100%
100%
Alternative testing recommendations
100%
100%
Business readability principle
100%
100%
Implementation detail avoidance
100%
100%
With context: $0.6212 · 3m 15s · 24 turns · 1,319 in / 7,249 out tokens
BDD test maintenance and refactoring workflows
Duplication identification
93%
93%
Scenario consolidation strategy
95%
95%
Step definition refactoring
90%
95%
Maintains scenario readability
93%
93%
Systematic refactoring approach
93%
93%
Preserves test intent
90%
90%
Reusable step library design
100%
100%
With context: $1.0099 · 5m 6s · 28 turns · 5,548 in / 12,527 out tokens
Advanced Cucumber workflow and CI integration
Multiple output formats
100%
100%
Advanced tag strategies
100%
100%
CI/CD pipeline integration
100%
100%
Failure analysis workflow
100%
100%
Performance and timing considerations
100%
100%
Report organization and usage
90%
100%
Configuration management
90%
70%
Exit code handling
80%
100%
With context: $0.9504 · 5m 12s · 34 turns · 403 in / 13,324 out tokens
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i pantheon-ai/bdd-testing@0.2.0Table of Contents