test-driven-development

TDD: enforce RED-GREEN-REFACTOR, tests before code.

Quality

65%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/software-development/test-driven-development/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%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.

The content is highly actionable with a crystal-clear validated workflow, but it carries redundant rationalization rebuttals across multiple sections and keeps everything in a single long inline file without external references, leaving conciseness and progressive disclosure at the mid-level.

Suggestions

Consolidate the overlapping rationalization material — keep either the 'Why Order Matters' prose, the 'Common Rationalizations' table, or the 'Red Flags' list, not all three — to remove redundant tokens.

Move the extensive rationalization/anti-pattern reference material into a separate references file (e.g. RATIONALIZATIONS.md) and link to it from a short overview, improving progressive disclosure.

Trim per-section asides like 'Cheating is OK in GREEN' duplicative commentary where the example already conveys the rule.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with concrete imperative guidance and real code, but the 'Why Order Matters', 'Common Rationalizations' table, and 'Red Flags' list restate the same anti-rationalization rebuttals multiple times, adding padded redundancy that fits 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than the lean score-4 anchor.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready pytest commands and Python examples (good/bad tests, RED and GREEN verification, delegate_task usage) covering the common cases, matching the score-5 anchor.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The RED-GREEN-REFACTOR sequence has explicit mandatory verification checkpoints, feedback loops ('Test fails? Fix the code, not the test'; 'If tests fail during refactor: Undo immediately'), and a verification checklist, matching the 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps, feedback loops, and checklists' anchor.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized with clear headers and no nested references, but no bundle files exist and the ~360-line body inlines bulk content (rationalization tables and repeated lists) that would benefit from a separate file; per the rubric's >50-line exception, the simple-skill 5 does not apply, landing this at 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline'.	3 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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.

The description is concise, third-person, and identifies a clear niche with usable trigger terms, but it omits an explicit 'Use when...' clause and lists only a couple of concrete actions, capping both completeness and specificity at the mid-level anchor.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'when' clause, e.g. 'Use when adding new features, fixing bugs, or changing behavior — any production code change.'

List a couple more concrete actions or trigger synonyms (e.g. 'test-driven development', 'unit tests', 'write the test first') to lift trigger-term coverage and specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the TDD domain and two concrete actions ('enforce RED-GREEN-REFACTOR', 'tests before code') but does not enumerate a comprehensive set of specific actions, matching the score-3 anchor and falling short of the several-actions coverage at score 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	Provides a clear 'what' (enforce the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle, tests before code) but lacks any explicit 'Use when...' trigger guidance; per the rubric guideline, a missing when-clause caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant natural keywords ('TDD', 'RED-GREEN-REFACTOR', 'tests before code') that users would say, but omits common variations like 'test-driven development' and 'unit tests', fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor rather than the fuller coverage at 4.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	TDD with the distinctive RED-GREEN-REFACTOR trigger carves a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, though it could overlap slightly with general testing skills, matching 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the fully-distinct anchor at 5.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

81%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 13 / 16 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
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	13 / 16 Passed

Repository: NousResearch/hermes-agent
Path: skills/software-development/test-driven-development/SKILL.md
Commit: 6327930

Reviewed: 3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.