CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

axiom-testing

Use when writing ANY test, debugging flaky tests, making tests faster, or choosing Swift Testing vs XCTest. Covers unit tests, UI tests, async testing, test architecture.

Quality

74%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude-plugin/plugins/axiom/skills/axiom-testing/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

63%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.

A well-built router skill: clear navigation structure, decisive recommendations, and actionable pointers with no concept padding. Its weaknesses are systematic duplication across four routing sections and references that do not resolve within the provided bundle.

Suggestions

Consolidate the redundant routing sections — Example Invocations largely restates the Decision Tree, and Critical Patterns repeats the Quick Reference; keep one table and one decision path.

Ensure the referenced targets (skills/swift-testing.md, skills/ui-testing.md, etc.) ship with the bundle, or state explicitly that they are sibling-suite paths, so the router's one-level-deep references resolve.

Drop the dot-graph Decision Tree in favor of the numbered list alone — they encode the same routing and the graph adds tokens without new information.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The same routing facts repeat across four sections: "skills/swift-testing.md" is pointed to in the Quick Reference, Decision Tree, Critical Patterns, and Example Invocations ("→ Read: `skills/swift-testing.md`"), and Example Invocations largely restates the Decision Tree. Mostly efficient with no concept over-explanation, but roughly a quarter of the body is duplicated routing that could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable navigation throughout: exact file paths ("skills/swift-testing.md"), agent names, a runnable command ("Launch `testing-auditor` agent or `/axiom:audit testing`"), and a decisive comparison table ("Unit tests (logic, models) | Swift Testing"). As an instruction-only router it has no code, which is not penalized, but the guidance itself is pointers rather than copy-paste content.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Routing is clearly sequenced via the numbered decision list and the symptom-to-reference table, with conditional checkpoints in the examples ("Check codebase: XCUIApplication/XCUIElement? → skills/ui-testing.md; Check codebase: @Test/#expect? → test-failure-analyzer"). Not a 5 because the dot graph duplicates the numbered list and agent-availability fallbacks live only in a dense blockquote.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Structure is exemplary — one-level-deep references, clearly signaled, with a dedicated navigation table. However, scored against the actual bundle: the referenced targets (skills/swift-testing.md, skills/testing-async.md, skills/ui-testing.md, skills/xctest-automation.md, skills/ui-recording.md) do not exist in this bundle (no references/ or sibling skills/ directory), so every routing target is unverifiable.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

75%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.

A strong description with an explicit trigger clause and several concrete capabilities. Its main weaknesses are the "ANY test" over-claim that obscures the Swift-specific scope and a "what" section that lists domains rather than actions.

Suggestions

Replace "writing ANY test" with a scope-explicit phrase like "writing Swift tests" so the description doesn't claim non-Swift testing questions it can't serve.

Add missing natural trigger terms such as "XCUITest", "test suite", and "code coverage" to broaden keyword coverage.

Make the "what" action-oriented (e.g., "Write, debug, and speed up Swift tests") instead of the abstract "Covers ... test architecture".

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"debugging flaky tests", "making tests faster", and "choosing Swift Testing vs XCTest" are concrete actions, but "Covers... test architecture" is abstract and "writing ANY test" is generic, leaving minor gaps versus comprehensive coverage.

4 / 5

Completeness

Both parts are present: an explicit "Use when..." clause with concrete triggers, and a "what" ("Covers unit tests, UI tests, async testing, test architecture"). Not a 5 because the "what" is a domain listing rather than the concrete action set the anchor-5 example shows.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would say are well covered ("flaky tests", "unit tests", "UI tests", "async testing", "Swift Testing", "XCTest"), but common synonyms like "XCUITest", "test suite", or "code coverage" are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"choosing Swift Testing vs XCTest" pins a clear niche, but "writing ANY test" carries no language qualifier and would trigger for non-Swift testing questions, creating minor overlap risk with other testing skills.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

CharlesWiltgen/Axiom

Path

.claude-plugin/plugins/axiom/skills/axiom-testing/SKILL.md

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.