web3-testing
Test smart contracts comprehensively using Hardhat and Foundry with unit tests, integration tests, and mainnet forking. Use when testing Solidity contracts, setting up blockchain test suites, or validating DeFi protocols.
78
68%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
94%
1.34xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./tests/ext_conformance/artifacts/agents-wshobson/blockchain-web3/skills/web3-testing/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description that clearly communicates specific capabilities (smart contract testing with Hardhat and Foundry), lists concrete test types, and provides explicit trigger guidance with natural keywords. It occupies a clear niche in blockchain development testing, making it highly distinguishable from other skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Test smart contracts comprehensively using Hardhat and Foundry with unit tests, integration tests, and mainnet forking.' This names specific tools (Hardhat, Foundry), test types (unit, integration), and techniques (mainnet forking). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (test smart contracts using Hardhat and Foundry with unit tests, integration tests, and mainnet forking) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when testing Solidity contracts, setting up blockchain test suites, or validating DeFi protocols'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'smart contracts', 'Hardhat', 'Foundry', 'unit tests', 'integration tests', 'mainnet forking', 'Solidity contracts', 'blockchain test suites', 'DeFi protocols'. These cover a good range of terms a developer would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche targeting blockchain/smart contract testing specifically with named tools (Hardhat, Foundry) and domain-specific triggers (Solidity, DeFi protocols, mainnet forking). Very unlikely to conflict with non-blockchain skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
37%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is a comprehensive but bloated reference catalog of smart contract testing patterns. While the code examples are high-quality and executable, the content fails to respect token budget by inlining extensive boilerplate that Claude can generate on its own. The lack of a clear sequential workflow and validation checkpoints makes it more of a cookbook than an actionable skill guide.
Suggestions
Reduce the main file to a concise overview with key patterns and decision points, moving detailed code examples into referenced files (e.g., references/hardhat-tests.md, references/foundry-tests.md)
Add a clear sequential workflow: 1) Choose framework → 2) Configure → 3) Write tests → 4) Run with coverage → 5) Validate coverage thresholds → 6) Fix gaps → 7) CI integration, with explicit validation checkpoints
Remove boilerplate code that Claude already knows how to write (basic test structure, standard config patterns) and focus on project-specific conventions, gotchas, and non-obvious patterns
Add validation steps such as 'verify coverage exceeds 90% before proceeding' and 'check for common vulnerabilities with slither before deployment'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is extremely verbose at ~300+ lines, with extensive boilerplate code examples that Claude already knows how to write. It explains basic concepts like fixtures, event testing, and coverage reporting that don't need this level of detail. The 'When to Use This Skill' section and many code blocks are padded with obvious patterns. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The code examples are fully executable and copy-paste ready, covering Hardhat config, unit tests with chai/ethers, Foundry tests with forge-std, mainnet forking, gas comparison, CI/CD YAML, and CLI commands. Concrete addresses, specific library imports, and real patterns are provided. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no clear sequential workflow for setting up and running a test suite. The content is organized as a reference catalog of patterns rather than a guided process. There are no validation checkpoints, no error recovery steps, and no explicit sequence like 'first do X, then validate Y, then proceed to Z'. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The Resources section references external files for deeper content, which is good. However, the main file is monolithic with ~300 lines of inline code that should be split into referenced files. The overview itself contains too much detail that belongs in separate reference documents. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- Dicklesworthstone/pi_agent_rust
- Commit
6e3d68c
- 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.