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

50%

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

57%Scale 1-3

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

This is a comprehensive Go testing reference with excellent actionability — every pattern includes complete, executable code examples and specific CLI commands. However, it suffers from being overly long and monolithic, cramming many distinct topics (TDD, table tests, mocking, benchmarks, fuzzing, HTTP testing, CI/CD) into a single file without progressive disclosure. Some content explains patterns Claude would already know (basic TDD steps, simple benchmark structure), reducing token efficiency.

Suggestions

Split advanced topics (fuzzing, benchmarks, HTTP testing, mocking, golden files, CI/CD) into separate referenced files, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with links to each topic.

Remove or significantly condense the step-by-step TDD walkthrough — Claude already understands RED-GREEN-REFACTOR; a brief reminder with one compact example would suffice.

Trim standard Go patterns that Claude already knows (e.g., basic httptest usage, simple benchmark loops) to just the non-obvious details or project-specific conventions.

Add explicit validation/verification checkpoints for multi-step workflows like 'run coverage, check threshold, fix gaps, re-run' rather than just listing commands.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is quite long (~400+ lines) and includes many patterns that an experienced Go developer (or Claude) would already know. The TDD step-by-step walkthrough with comments like '步驟 1', '步驟 2' is verbose, and sections like basic benchmark patterns and HTTP handler testing are fairly standard Go knowledge. However, the code examples are clean and not padded with excessive prose.	2 / 3
Actionability	Every section provides fully executable, copy-paste ready Go code with concrete examples. Commands are specific (e.g., `go test -bench=BenchmarkProcess -benchmem`), test patterns include complete function signatures, and even the CI/CD section has a working GitHub Actions YAML.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The TDD RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle is clearly sequenced with explicit verification steps (run test, verify failure, implement, verify pass). However, there are no validation checkpoints for more complex workflows like coverage checking or fuzzing — the skill mostly presents isolated patterns rather than end-to-end workflows with error recovery loops.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The entire skill is a monolithic document with no references to external files or bundle resources. All content — from basic table-driven tests to fuzzing, benchmarks, HTTP testing, mocking, golden files, CI/CD — is inlined in a single file. This would benefit significantly from splitting into separate reference files for advanced topics.	1 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Description

42%Scale 1-3

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 does well at listing specific Go testing capabilities and uses appropriate domain terminology. However, it critically lacks a 'Use when...' clause, which means Claude has no explicit guidance on when to select this skill over others. The trigger terms are decent but could include more common user-facing variations.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause such as 'Use when the user asks about writing Go tests, running benchmarks, generating test coverage, or following TDD practices in Go.'

Include additional natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'unit test', 'go test', '_test.go', 'testing package', 'mock', or 'test helpers'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions/patterns: table-driven tests, subtests, benchmarks, fuzzing, test coverage, and TDD methodology. These are all concrete, well-defined testing concepts.	3 / 3
Completeness	Describes what the skill covers (Go testing patterns) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2, and the 'when' is not even implied strongly enough to warrant a 2.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant terms like 'table-driven tests', 'subtests', 'benchmarks', 'fuzzing', 'test coverage', and 'TDD', which are natural terms Go developers would use. However, it misses common variations like 'unit test', 'go test', '_test.go', 'testing package', or 'mock'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Specifying 'Go' and specific testing patterns like 'table-driven tests' and 'fuzzing' provides some distinctiveness, but without explicit trigger conditions it could overlap with general Go development skills or generic testing skills.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 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

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: affaan-m/everything-claude-code
Path: docs/zh-TW/skills/golang-testing/SKILL.md
Commit: 0c1d7be

Reviewed: 6 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.