CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testing-best-practices

Test layering, execution, and CI guidance across unit, integration, and e2e. Use when designing tests, writing test cases, or planning test strategy for a module.

85

1.64x
Quality

79%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

97%

1.64x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./data/skills-md/0xbigboss/claude-code/testing-best-practices/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%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 lean, highly actionable testing-strategy skill with clear sections, concrete templates, and a sequenced workflow with feedback loops. Minor gains from trimming restated basics, adding an explicit validation gate in the main workflow, and possibly splitting the output-format templates into a reference file.

Suggestions

Drop or compress the per-layer 'Purpose:' one-liners (e.g. 'verify individual functions and invariants in isolation') — Claude already knows what unit/integration/e2e tests are.

Add an explicit validate-then-proceed checkpoint to the main Workflow (e.g. confirm the matrix covers all public API functions before producing the implementation plan) to push workflow_clarity to 5.

Consider extracting the Test Matrix / Implementation Plan markdown templates into a references/ file and signaling them from SKILL.md, which would tighten the body and improve progressive_disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense, bullet-driven, and assumes Claude knows testing concepts, but brief "Purpose: verify individual functions..." lines per layer restate concepts Claude already knows, fitting 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'; not a 5 because of those restated basics.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, specific guidance throughout — case categories, the {CATEGORY}-{NN} ID scheme, copy-ready markdown output templates with worked examples, retry bounds (max 3), and preflight checklists — fitting 'mostly executable guidance; concrete examples with minor gaps'; not a 5 because, as an instruction-only planning skill, it stops short of fully copy-paste-ready executable artifacts.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step Workflow with a feedback loop (step 5: propose missing cases before appending), plus preflight checks and classify-before-fix flake handling, matches 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'; not a 5 because the main workflow lacks an explicit validate-then-proceed gate comparable to the anchor's 'validate -> only when valid -> proceed'.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Single cohesive guidance file, no bundle references needed, organized under clear section headers (When to activate, Test layering policy, Hard rules, Execution guidance, Output format, CI guidance, Workflow), fitting 'good structure; most content appropriately placed'; not a 5 because at ~167 lines it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill carve-out that would let well-organized sections alone reach 5.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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: third-person, concrete on both what and when, with natural trigger phrases. Minor room to sharpen specificity into verbs and to add common synonym triggers like 'unit/e2e tests'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Test layering, execution, and CI guidance across unit, integration, and e2e" lists several specific capability areas (layering, execution, CI) across three named test layers, matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor; not a 5 because the named items are capability areas rather than fully concrete verbs.

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly states both what ("Test layering, execution, and CI guidance across unit, integration, and e2e") and when ("Use when designing tests, writing test cases, or planning test strategy for a module") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the 5 anchor exactly; not lower because neither half is missing or vague.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when designing tests, writing test cases, or planning test strategy" supplies natural phrases a user would say, but misses common synonyms/variants like 'unit tests', 'e2e tests', or 'test plan', fitting 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (test layering/execution/CI strategy for a module) is mostly distinct with concrete triggers, but testing is a broad domain with potential overlap against general code-quality or testing-adjacent skills, so it fits 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the 5 'clear niche / minimal conflict'.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
NeverSight/learn-skills.dev
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.