android-testing
Write unit tests, Compose UI tests, and Hilt-integrated tests for Android. Use when writing test files or testing ViewModels, Composables, or Repositories with MockK and coroutine test utilities.
58
68%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/android/android-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 defines its scope (Android testing), lists specific concrete actions and targets, and includes an explicit 'Use when' clause with natural trigger terms. The description is concise yet comprehensive, covering the technology stack (MockK, Hilt, Compose, coroutines) and architectural components (ViewModels, Repositories, Composables) that would naturally appear in user requests.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Write unit tests', 'Compose UI tests', 'Hilt-integrated tests' for Android, and mentions specific targets like ViewModels, Composables, Repositories with specific tools (MockK, coroutine test utilities). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (write unit tests, Compose UI tests, Hilt-integrated tests for Android) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when writing test files or testing ViewModels, Composables, or Repositories with MockK and coroutine test utilities'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'unit tests', 'UI tests', 'Hilt', 'Android', 'ViewModels', 'Composables', 'Repositories', 'MockK', 'coroutine test', 'test files'. These cover a wide range of terms a developer would naturally use when requesting Android testing help. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche: Android-specific testing with particular frameworks (Hilt, MockK, Compose) and patterns (ViewModels, Repositories). Unlikely to conflict with general testing skills or non-Android 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.
The skill is concise and well-organized but critically lacks actionability — it tells Claude what tools to use without showing how to use them. There are no code examples for any of the three test types mentioned (unit, UI, Hilt-integrated), making it a description of testing standards rather than an executable guide. The workflow for writing tests is entirely absent.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable code examples for each test type: a ViewModel unit test with MockK and runTest, a Compose UI test with createAndroidComposeRule, and a Hilt-integrated test with @TestInstallIn.
Add a MainDispatcherRule code snippet since it's referenced but never shown, and it's a non-obvious boilerplate pattern.
Include a brief workflow sequence for writing a test: e.g., 1) Create test class with annotations → 2) Set up rules/mocks → 3) Write test function → 4) Run and verify.
Either provide the referenced 'references/implementation.md' bundle file or inline its critical content (test rule setup patterns) into the SKILL.md.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient. It avoids explaining what unit tests, MockK, or Hilt are, and assumes Claude's competence with Android testing concepts. Every line adds specific, non-obvious guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides no executable code examples, no concrete test snippets, and no copy-paste ready patterns. It describes what to use (e.g., 'Use MockK', 'Use runTest') but never shows how. A ViewModel test example, a Compose UI test example, or a MainDispatcherRule setup would be essential. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no sequenced workflow for writing tests. The content lists tools and anti-patterns but doesn't guide Claude through the steps of creating a test file, setting up dependencies, writing assertions, or validating test results. For a testing skill, a clear workflow (create test class → set up rules → mock dependencies → write test → run/verify) is needed. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references 'references/implementation.md' for test rules, which is a reasonable one-level-deep reference. However, no bundle files are provided, so the reference is unverifiable. The main content is well-structured with clear sections, but the referenced file likely contains critical details (like MainDispatcherRule implementation) that should either be inline or confirmed to exist. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- HoangNguyen0403/agent-skills-standard
- Commit
3df717f
- 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.