golang-testing

Patrones de pruebas Go incluyendo pruebas basadas en tablas, subpruebas, benchmarks, fuzzing y cobertura de código. Sigue la metodología TDD con prácticas idiomáticas de Go.

Quality

75%

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 ./docs/es/skills/golang-testing/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

78%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 strong, highly actionable Go testing reference with comprehensive executable examples and a clear TDD workflow, undermined mainly by its monolithic single-file structure that should progressively disclose detail into reference files.

Suggestions

Split the deeper material (fuzzing, benchmarking, mocking, CI/CD) into reference files under references/ and link to them from SKILL.md so the body stays a concise overview.

Trim descriptive prose like 'El patrón estándar para pruebas Go. Permite cobertura comprensiva con código mínimo.' since the code already conveys the pattern.

Add explicit validation/retry checkpoints to the non-TDD workflows (e.g. run with -race and confirm coverage threshold before declaring done) to strengthen workflow_clarity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is dominated by executable code with brief Spanish section intros and avoids explaining basic concepts Claude already knows, though a few descriptive sentences and the step-by-step TDD comments could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides copy-paste-ready, executable code for table tests, subtests, helpers, golden files, mocking, benchmarks, fuzzing, HTTP handlers, coverage commands, and CI/CD, covering the common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The TDD RED-GREEN-REFACTOR flow is sequenced with explicit verify-fail/verify-pass checkpoints, but most other sections are pattern references without a guided multi-step workflow or error-recovery loops.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers give good structure, but the ~715-line body is monolithic with all detailed material inlined and no references/scripts/assets files to offload deeper content.	3 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

71%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 specific and lists a comprehensive set of Go testing actions, but it omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger clause, which limits its completeness and makes activation guidance implicit.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when writing or running Go tests, benchmarks, fuzz tests, or measuring coverage in Go projects.'

Include common synonyms/file cues users would naturally say, such as 'unit tests', 'table-driven tests', 'go test', and '.go files', to broaden trigger coverage.

Keep the third-person voice but lead with the trigger context so the 'when' is as concrete as the 'what'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete actions — 'pruebas basadas en tablas, subpruebas, benchmarks, fuzzing y cobertura de código' plus TDD methodology — giving comprehensive coverage of Go testing capabilities.	5 / 5
Completeness	There is a clear 'what' (Go testing patterns) but no 'Use when...' or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms a Go developer would say are present ('pruebas Go', 'benchmarks', 'fuzzing', 'cobertura de código', 'TDD'), but a few common synonyms/extensions are missing (e.g. 'unit tests', '.go').	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'Go' qualifier and named testing techniques carve a clear niche, but there is minor overlap risk with a generic testing/TDD skill.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 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
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (721 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
relative_links	Relative link issues: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	13 / 16 Passed

Repository: affaan-m/ECC
Path: docs/es/skills/golang-testing/SKILL.md
Commit: c70874f

Reviewed: 1 day 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.