sqlitecpp-testing-practices

GoogleTest patterns and testing practices for SQLiteCpp test coverage and structure.

Quality

70%

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 ./.claude/skills/sqlitecpp-testing-practices/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

86%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 body is concise, actionable, and well-structured with concrete code and commands plus correctly signaled canonical references. Its main gap is the lack of a TEST_F fixture example and an explicit validation checkpoint, which keep actionability and workflow clarity at 4.

Suggestions

Add a short TEST_F fixture example alongside the TEST() example to cover the shared-fixture case you reference in Common Patterns.

Note a quick validation checkpoint after registering a new test file (e.g. confirm it appears in `ctest -N` or `meson test --list`) to strengthen the workflow.

Consider showing how to scope filter runs (e.g. `--gtest_filter=DatabaseTest.CanOpenReadWriteDatabase`) as a debugging tip.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Lean and efficient throughout; it never explains what GoogleTest or SQLite is and every section (scope, structure, adding a file, running) earns its place. The Arrange/Act/Assert comments teach a pattern rather than pad.	5 / 5
Actionability	Provides an executable GoogleTest example, exact CMake/meson registration steps, and copy-paste run commands with --gtest_filter. Minor gap: no fixture (TEST_F) example despite mentioning it.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	"Adding a New Test File" is a clear, ordered procedure (create file, register in CMakeLists, register in meson.build) and "Running Tests" gives concrete commands. It is a simple, non-destructive skill so the missing error-recovery loop keeps it just below 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized sections with one-level-deep, clearly signaled references to real canonical files (tests/Database_test.cpp, CMakeLists.txt, meson.build) and cross-references to sibling skills; appropriately scoped for a short single-purpose skill.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 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 clearly identifies its domain and is reasonably specific, but lacks an explicit trigger clause telling Claude when to use it. Adding a "Use when..." sentence with natural trigger phrases would lift completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when writing or reviewing GoogleTest tests for SQLiteCpp, registering new test files, or structuring test coverage."

Include natural user phrasings and synonyms (e.g. "write tests", "test fixtures", "gtest_filter") to improve trigger-term quality.

Replace category words like "patterns" and "practices" with a few concrete actions (e.g. "write TEST() cases, register test files in CMake/meson, run gtest_filter") to raise specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain and a few concrete actions ("GoogleTest patterns", "testing practices", "test coverage and structure") but these read as categories rather than a comprehensive list of specific actions.	3 / 5
Completeness	The "what" is clear (GoogleTest patterns/practices for SQLiteCpp test coverage and structure) but there is no explicit "Use when..." trigger clause, capping completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant keywords ("GoogleTest", "testing practices", "test coverage") but misses common natural phrasings a user would say, such as "write tests for SQLiteCpp" or "test fixtures".	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Scoped to a specific project (SQLiteCpp) and testing context, giving it a distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against generic testing skills.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: SRombauts/SQLiteCpp
Path: .claude/skills/sqlitecpp-testing-practices/SKILL.md
Commit: 672a1e0

Reviewed: 5 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.