CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

counterexample-to-test-generator

Automatically generates executable test cases from model checking counterexample traces. Translates abstract counterexample states and transitions into concrete test inputs, execution steps, and assertions that reproduce property violations. Use when working with model checker outputs (SPIN, CBMC, NuSMV, TLA+, Java PathFinder, etc.) and needing to create regression tests, validate bug fixes, or reproduce verification failures in executable test suites.

82

1.16x
Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

99%

1.16x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/counterexample-to-test-generator/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

57%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is well-structured with a clear five-step workflow and excellent progressive disclosure pointing to real reference and asset bundles. Its weaknesses are incomplete/pseudocode examples and validation that is scattered into Best Practices rather than embedded as explicit workflow checkpoints.

Suggestions

Make Step 4's code blocks executable instead of comment placeholders, or replace them with a brief pointer to the language templates in assets/test_templates/.

Complete the Example Workflow C snippet so it compiles (declare lock_a/lock_b, t1/t2, and define thread2_func) and add an explicit run command and expected output.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint to the workflow (e.g., 'Step 6: Compile and run the generated test; confirm it fails as expected, then iterate if it passes or does not build') rather than burying 'Test the test' in Best Practices.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient with well-organized bullet steps and no heavy 'what is a model checker' preamble, but Step 4's code blocks are comment pseudocode ('// Initialize variables to counterexample initial state') that add tokens without executable value, and some Best Practices ('Minimize test complexity', 'Preserve causality') restate what Claude already knows, fitting the 3 anchor.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides a concrete worked C example using real pthread APIs, but it is incomplete (undeclared lock_a/lock_b/t1/t2, undefined thread2_func, '// ... rest of test') and Step 4 is comment pseudocode rather than executable code, matching the 3 'pseudocode instead of executable code; missing key details' anchor.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The five steps (Analyze Inputs → Map States → Generate Structure → Implement Logic → Generate Output) are clearly sequenced, but validation is only implicit — 'Test the test: Verify the generated test actually fails as expected' lives in Best Practices rather than as an explicit checkpoint in the flow, fitting the 3 'checkpoints missing or implicit' anchor.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references — 'See references/model_checker_formats.md for format details' and 'assets/test_templates/' — both verified as real bundle paths, with format specs and templates appropriately split out of the body rather than inlined, matching the 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

88%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is specific, third-person, and explicitly pairs a clear 'what' with a concrete 'Use when' trigger clause naming the relevant model checkers. It is comprehensive on capabilities and triggers, with only minor overlap risk against generic test-generation skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'generates executable test cases', 'Translates abstract counterexample states and transitions into concrete test inputs, execution steps, and assertions that reproduce property violations' — giving comprehensive coverage of the domain, matching the 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers what ('generates executable test cases from model checking counterexample traces...') and when ('Use when working with model checker outputs ... and needing to create regression tests, validate bug fixes, or reproduce verification failures'), matching the 5 anchor with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong keyword coverage including named model checkers (SPIN, CBMC, NuSMV, TLA+, Java PathFinder), 'counterexample traces', 'regression tests', and 'reproduce verification failures', but 'etc.' signals partial listing and natural terms like 'formal verification' or 'bounded model checking' are absent, fitting the 4 anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear niche (formal-verification counterexamples → tests) with distinct tool-name triggers, but 'regression tests' and 'validate bug fixes' overlap slightly with general test-generation skills, fitting the 4 'minor overlap risk' anchor rather than 5.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE
Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.