CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

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.

68

Quality

83%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

71%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-architected routing skill with excellent progressive disclosure and clear, actionable navigation to sibling references and agents. Its main weakness is redundancy: the same routing map is repeated across several sections, inflating the token budget without adding new information.

Suggestions

Collapse the Decision Tree graph, numbered list, Critical Patterns, and Example Invocations into a single routing section; keep one table plus one short example-driven walkthrough rather than four restatements of the same map.

Fold the 'Critical Patterns' bullets into the Quick Reference rows so each reference carries its key patterns inline once, instead of repeating the reference list with expanded notes.

Trim the Example Invocations to 3-4 representative cases or move them into the Quick Reference as a 'symptom → action' column to avoid restating routing decisions a third time.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The routing map is restated roughly four times — Quick Reference table, Decision Tree graph, numbered Decision Tree list, Critical Patterns, and Example Invocations — so while it never explains concepts Claude already knows, the redundancy is more than minor over-explanation, fitting the "could be tightened" anchor at 3 rather than 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

Routing guidance is concrete and executable — specific file paths ("skills/swift-testing.md"), named agents ("test-failure-analyzer"), and copy-paste commands ("/axiom:audit testing") — but it deliberately defers executable code/detail to referenced files, leaving minor gaps versus fully copy-paste-ready content at 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Decision Tree graph plus numbered list gives a clear, unambiguous classification sequence from task type to the right reference/agent, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops (none are needed for pure routing), so it sits at the clear-sequence anchor rather than 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

This is a textbook progressive-disclosure router: a concise overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep references to sibling skills/*.md files via a Quick Reference table, decision tree, and pattern list, making navigation easy and matching the clear-overview anchor.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

96%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, third-person description with explicit "Use when" triggers, concrete actions, and good synonym coverage. The only weakness is the broad "ANY test" phrasing, which slightly raises overlap risk with adjacent skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — "writing ANY test, debugging flaky tests, making tests faster, choosing Swift Testing vs XCTest" — plus scope areas (unit, UI, async, architecture), matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor rather than the 1-2-action anchor at 3.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: "when" via the "Use when ..." trigger clause and "what" via "Covers unit tests, UI tests, async testing, test architecture", with concrete trigger phrases — a clear match to the anchor that requires both.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms a Swift developer would actually say are well covered with synonyms/framework names — "flaky tests", "Swift Testing", "XCTest", "unit tests", "UI tests", "async testing" — matching the comprehensive-synonyms anchor; not a 4 because common variations are present rather than a few missing.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Framework-specific triggers (Swift Testing, XCTest) carve a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, but the emphasized broad phrase "writing ANY test" leaves minor overlap risk with sibling build/debug skills, so it sits just below the 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Total

19

/

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.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
CharlesWiltgen/Axiom
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.