CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tdd-workflow

Test-driven development workflow: write a failing test first, watch it fail, implement the smallest change to green, then refactor with 80%+ coverage across unit, integration, and E2E tests. Use when writing a new feature, fixing a bug, refactoring, or when told to write failing tests first.

60

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/tdd-workflow/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

62%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 TDD workflow itself (Steps 0–8, runner detection, RED/GREEN gates, checkpoint commits, evidence report) is exceptionally clear and actionable. The skill is dragged down by generic testing-tutorial padding and a monolithic structure with no progressive disclosure — the example libraries and reference material should live in reference files, not the main body.

Suggestions

Move the Testing Patterns, Mocking External Services, E2E patterns, and Test File Organization sections into reference files (e.g. references/patterns.md, references/mocking.md) and link them from a short overview, keeping SKILL.md focused on the workflow steps.

Delete the 'Common Testing Mistakes', 'Best Practices', and 'Success Metrics' sections — they restate testing knowledge Claude already has and add no skill-specific value.

Replace stub examples ('// Implementation here', the empty 'handles database errors gracefully' test) with complete, runnable ones, or explicitly mark them as templates.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Multiple full sections restate testing knowledge Claude already has: a basic Button unit-test pattern, 'Common Testing Mistakes' (test user-visible behavior, avoid brittle selectors, keep tests independent), a 10-item generic 'Best Practices' list (Arrange-Act-Assert, descriptive test names), and a 'Success Metrics' section that restates the coverage requirement. This is noticeably verbose with several padded sections rather than mostly efficient with occasional slack.

2 / 5

Actionability

The runner-detection procedure, command matrix, commit-message formats, and RED/GREEN gate criteria are concrete and executable, and placeholders are explicitly resolved in Step 0. However, several code examples are stubs ('// Implementation here', '// Test implementation', an empty 'handles database errors gracefully' test), so it is mostly rather than fully copy-paste ready.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 0–8 are explicitly sequenced with hard validation gates: the RED state is defined with runtime and compile-time paths and explicit exclusion of unrelated failures, GREEN must be re-verified on the same test target before refactoring, checkpoint commits are tied to each stage, and Step 8 produces an evidence report. This matches the clear-sequence-with-explicit-validation-and-feedback-loops anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files at all; roughly 230 lines of Testing Patterns, Mocking examples, E2E patterns, and test-file-organization content are inlined in SKILL.md where they belong in separate reference files. Section headers provide reasonable structure, so this sits at 'some structure but content that should be separate is inline' rather than the minimal-structure anchor.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

85%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 with a fully specified workflow, quantified coverage target, and an explicit 'Use when' clause covering four triggers. Its main weakness is that the broad development-activity triggers reduce distinctiveness against general coding skills, and it lacks the 'TDD'/'test-driven' synonyms users commonly type.

Suggestions

Add the terms users naturally type for this workflow — 'TDD', 'test-driven development', 'red/green cycle', 'write tests first' — to the trigger clause.

Narrow the trigger conditions (e.g. 'when the user asks for a TDD workflow or test-first development') so generic feature/bug/refactor requests do not activate this skill over general coding skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions ("write a failing test first, watch it fail, implement the smallest change to green, then refactor") with a quantified coverage target ("80%+ coverage across unit, integration, and E2E tests"), matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what (the full RED/GREEN/refactor cycle with coverage scope) and when ("Use when writing a new feature, fixing a bug, refactoring, or when told to write failing tests first"), exactly matching the top anchor with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases like "writing a new feature", "fixing a bug", "refactoring", and "write failing tests first" are present, but common synonyms such as "TDD", "test-driven", "red/green", or "write tests" are missing, so it fits the good-coverage-with-a-few-gaps anchor rather than the comprehensive one.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Writing a new feature", "fixing a bug", and "refactoring" are generic development triggers that overlap with nearly any coding skill, so it could fire for the wrong skill; only "write failing tests first" is distinctive, placing it at the overlap-with-similar-skills anchor rather than the minor-overlap anchor.

3 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Validation

75%

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

Validation — 12 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (584 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

12

/

16

Passed

Repository
affaan-m/ECC
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.