CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

cpp-testing

C++ テストの作成/更新/修正、GoogleTest/CTest の設定、失敗またはフレーキーなテストの診断、カバレッジ/サニタイザーの追加時にのみ使用します。

87

1.22x
Quality

82%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

92%

1.22x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

64%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This is a solid, actionable skill with excellent executable code examples covering GoogleTest, GMock, CMake/CTest, coverage, and sanitizers. Its main weaknesses are verbosity (redundant sections on flaky tests and best practices, explanations of concepts Claude knows), and the lack of progressive disclosure — the content would benefit from splitting detailed examples into separate reference files. Adding explicit validation checkpoints in the debugging and coverage workflows would also strengthen it.

Suggestions

Remove or consolidate the overlapping 'Flaky Test Guardrails' and 'Best Practices' sections — the same advice (no sleep, unique temp dirs, avoid real time/network) appears in both.

Trim or remove explanations of concepts Claude already knows, such as what TDD is, what mocks vs fakes are, and basic testing principles like 'keep tests deterministic'.

Add explicit validation/verification steps in the debugging and coverage workflows (e.g., 'verify coverage.info is non-empty before running genhtml').

Split detailed code examples (coverage toolchains, sanitizer configs, fuzzing) into separate reference files and link from the main SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is fairly comprehensive but includes some unnecessary content Claude already knows (e.g., explaining TDD loop concepts, what mocks vs fakes are, basic best practices like 'keep tests deterministic'). The 'When to use / When not to use' section and some best practices are verbose. The flaky test guardrails and best practices sections have significant overlap. However, the code examples are lean and the CMake configurations are useful.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides fully executable code examples throughout: complete gtest/gmock tests, CMake configuration with FetchContent, bash commands for building/running/coverage, sanitizer CMake options, and coverage toolchain commands. All examples are copy-paste ready with realistic structure.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The TDD workflow (RED → GREEN → REFACTOR) is clearly sequenced, and the debugging section has a reasonable 4-step process. However, the debugging workflow lacks explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops — it says 'expand to full suite' but doesn't specify verification steps. The coverage workflow is a sequence of commands without validation of success between steps.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The content is a single monolithic file with no references to external files despite being over 200 lines. The code examples (fixtures, mocks, CMake, coverage, sanitizers, fuzzing) could be split into separate reference files. The sections are well-organized with clear headers, but the document is long enough that progressive disclosure into supporting files would improve it.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

100%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This is a well-crafted skill description that clearly defines its scope around C++ testing with specific frameworks (GoogleTest/CTest). It explicitly states when to use the skill with concrete trigger conditions and lists multiple specific actions. The description is concise yet comprehensive, covering testing lifecycle activities from creation to diagnosis.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: creating/updating/fixing C++ tests, configuring GoogleTest/CTest, diagnosing failing or flaky tests, and adding coverage/sanitizers.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (C++ test creation/update/fix, GoogleTest/CTest configuration, diagnosing flaky tests, adding coverage/sanitizers) and 'when' with an explicit trigger clause ('のみ使用します' = 'Use only when...' followed by specific conditions).

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes strong natural trigger terms users would say: 'C++ テスト', 'GoogleTest', 'CTest', 'フレーキー' (flaky), 'カバレッジ' (coverage), 'サニタイザー' (sanitizer). These cover the key terms a user working with C++ testing would naturally use.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive with a clear niche: C++ testing specifically with GoogleTest/CTest. The mention of specific frameworks and tools like sanitizers and coverage makes it unlikely to conflict with general coding or other language testing skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
affaan-m/everything-claude-code
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.