golang-testing

Go testing patterns including table-driven tests, subtests, benchmarks, fuzzing, and test coverage. Follows TDD methodology with idiomatic Go practices.

1.12x

Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

80%

1.12x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./docs/zh-TW/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 highly actionable, idiomatic Go testing reference with executable examples across the full testing surface, weakened mainly by a monolithic single-file structure and some over-explanation of TDD concepts Claude already knows.

Suggestions

Split large reference sections (benchmarks, fuzzing, CI/CD) into files under references/ and link to them from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Trim the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR explanation and the repeated TestAdd examples, assuming Claude's familiarity with basic TDD.

Add explicit feedback loops (run -> on failure fix -> re-run) for the fuzzing and coverage workflows to reach the top workflow-clarity anchor.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean executable code with brief labels, but it dedicates space to explaining TDD/RED-GREEN-REFACTOR and repeats the TestAdd example in several forms — minor over-explanation that could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	Provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready Go code and shell commands covering the common cases — table-driven tests, subtests, t.Helper/Cleanup/TempDir, golden files, interface mocks, benchmarks, fuzzing, coverage, httptest, and the standard go test command set.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The TDD RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle is clearly sequenced with explicit run-and-verify checkpoints, but there are no error-recovery feedback loops and the bulk of the skill is a pattern catalog rather than a guided workflow.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	There are no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent) and the entire ~700-line guide is inlined in SKILL.md with good section headers, but content that could be split (benchmarks, fuzzing, CI) is not separated; the simple-skill exception does not apply since the file is well over 50 lines.	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.

A specific, well-scoped Go-testing description that names concrete patterns, but it omits any explicit 'when to use' trigger clause, capping its completeness and limiting its trigger utility.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g. 'Use when writing Go tests, adding coverage, or following TDD in a Go project'.

Include natural trigger synonyms users say, such as 'go test', '.go files', and 'test coverage'.

Consider phrasing patterns as actions ('write table-driven tests', 'run benchmarks') to strengthen action specificity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete Go testing patterns — 'table-driven tests, subtests, benchmarks, fuzzing, and test coverage' — giving comprehensive coverage of the domain's action types.	5 / 5
Completeness	The description clearly states what the skill does but contains no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains good natural keywords a user would say ('Go testing', 'benchmarks', 'fuzzing', 'TDD') but omits common variations such as the 'go test' command, '.go' files, and synonyms, keeping it just below comprehensive.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Go-testing niche is clearly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against a general testing/TDD skill; absence of an explicit trigger phrase keeps it from a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (711 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning
relative_links	Relative link issues: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: affaan-m/ECC
Path: docs/zh-TW/skills/golang-testing/SKILL.md
Commit: e04ea0b

Reviewed: 2 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.