CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

tdd-workflow

Use this skill when writing new features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code. Enforces test-driven development with 80%+ coverage including unit, integration, and E2E tests.

43

Quality

43%

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 ./docs/zh-TW/skills/tdd-workflow/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

27%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 skill is a comprehensive but overly verbose TDD guide that explains many concepts Claude already knows (TDD principles, test types, Arrange-Act-Assert). While it provides some concrete code examples, several are incomplete with placeholder comments. The monolithic structure with no progressive disclosure makes it token-inefficient, and the project-specific examples (Supabase, Redis, OpenAI mocks) limit generalizability without being clearly scoped to a specific project.

Suggestions

Cut the content by at least 50%: remove explanations of what TDD is, what test types are, and generic best practices lists—Claude already knows these. Focus only on project-specific conventions and non-obvious patterns.

Complete all placeholder test implementations (e.g., '// 測試實作', '// 測試錯誤處理') with actual executable code, or remove them entirely.

Split into multiple files: keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with the 7-step workflow, and move mock patterns, E2E examples, and test organization into separate referenced files.

Add explicit error recovery steps: what to do when coverage drops below 80%, how to handle flaky E2E tests, and when it's acceptable to skip TDD (e.g., exploratory prototyping).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose at ~300+ lines. Explains TDD concepts Claude already knows (what TDD is, what unit/integration/E2E tests are, Arrange-Act-Assert pattern, basic testing principles). The 'best practices' list and 'success metrics' are generic knowledge. The mock examples, while concrete, are project-specific (Supabase, Redis, OpenAI) yet presented as general patterns. Much content could be cut by 60%+ without losing actionable value.

1 / 3

Actionability

Provides concrete code examples (Jest/Vitest tests, Playwright tests, mock patterns) that are mostly executable, but many test bodies contain placeholder comments like '// 測試實作' and '// 測試錯誤處理' instead of actual implementations. The TDD workflow steps are clear but the code examples are a mix of complete and incomplete.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 7-step TDD workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit steps (write test → run → implement → run → refactor → verify coverage). However, there's no feedback loop for when coverage falls below 80% or when tests fail unexpectedly during refactoring. The validation step (Step 7) exists but lacks error recovery guidance.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. All content—mock patterns, test patterns, CI/CD config, file organization, best practices—is inlined in a single massive document. No bundle files exist, but the content is long enough that splitting into referenced files (e.g., MOCK_PATTERNS.md, E2E_EXAMPLES.md) would significantly improve usability.

1 / 3

Total

6

/

12

Passed

Description

59%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 has good structural completeness with explicit 'use when' and 'what' clauses, and the TDD/coverage requirement adds some specificity. However, the trigger conditions are far too broad—writing features, fixing bugs, and refactoring cover essentially all coding work—which would cause this skill to conflict with nearly any other development skill. The description also uses second person voice ('Use this skill') rather than third person.

Suggestions

Narrow the trigger conditions significantly—instead of 'writing new features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code' (which covers all development), specify when TDD enforcement is specifically needed, e.g., 'Use when the user requests test-driven development, asks for high test coverage, or wants tests written alongside code changes.'

Add more distinctive capability details that separate this from general coding skills, e.g., 'Generates test cases before implementation, enforces red-green-refactor workflow, validates coverage thresholds' to clarify what makes this skill unique.

Rewrite in third person voice (e.g., 'Enforces test-driven development...' as the lead) rather than second person ('Use this skill when...' as the lead) to follow description conventions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names some actions ('writing new features, fixing bugs, refactoring code') and mentions TDD with coverage requirements, but the actions are broad software development activities rather than specific concrete capabilities unique to this skill.

2 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'when' ('Use this skill when writing new features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code') and 'what' ('Enforces test-driven development with 80%+ coverage including unit, integration, and E2E tests'). Has a clear 'Use when' clause with explicit triggers.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes some natural terms like 'features', 'bugs', 'refactoring', 'test-driven development', 'unit', 'integration', 'E2E tests', but these are extremely common development terms that would match nearly any coding request. Missing more specific trigger variations.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The triggers 'writing new features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code' are so broad they would match virtually any coding task, creating high conflict risk with other development-related skills. Nearly every programming skill could be triggered by these terms.

1 / 3

Total

8

/

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.