testing
Use when writing or running tests for this project. Covers unit vs E2E test decisions, test file locations, mock patterns, and project-specific testing conventions. (project)
82
77%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/testing/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
67%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 a clear 'Use when' trigger clause and identifies the testing domain well, which is its main strength. However, it describes topics covered rather than concrete actions Claude will perform, and the trigger terms could be more comprehensive to capture common user phrasings around testing.
Suggestions
Replace topic-oriented language with concrete actions, e.g., 'Creates and runs unit and E2E tests, sets up mock patterns, places test files in correct locations' instead of 'Covers unit vs E2E test decisions.'
Add more natural trigger term variations such as 'test suite,' 'spec files,' 'test coverage,' 'integration tests,' or framework-specific terms relevant to the project.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (testing) and mentions some specific areas like 'unit vs E2E test decisions, test file locations, mock patterns,' but doesn't list concrete actions (e.g., 'create test files,' 'run test suites,' 'generate mocks'). It describes topics covered rather than actions performed. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Explicitly answers both 'what' (covers unit vs E2E test decisions, test file locations, mock patterns, testing conventions) and 'when' ('Use when writing or running tests for this project'). The 'Use when...' clause is present and clear. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant keywords like 'tests,' 'unit,' 'E2E,' 'mock patterns,' and 'testing conventions,' which users might naturally say. However, it misses common variations like 'test suite,' 'jest,' 'pytest,' 'spec files,' 'test coverage,' or 'integration tests.' | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The testing focus provides some distinctiveness, but 'project-specific testing conventions' is broad and could overlap with general coding style guides or project configuration skills. The scope is somewhat clear but not sharply delineated. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a strong, well-structured testing skill that efficiently communicates project-specific conventions without wasting tokens on concepts Claude already knows. Its greatest strengths are actionability (concrete commands, code examples, decision table) and conciseness. The only notable weakness is the workflow section, which could benefit from explicit validation checkpoints and error recovery guidance.
Suggestions
Add brief error recovery guidance to the 'Running Tests During Development' workflow, e.g., what to do when type checks fail or when E2E tests fail due to container issues.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient throughout. It doesn't explain what testing is or how vitest works—it jumps straight into project-specific conventions, locations, commands, and patterns. Every section earns its place with actionable, project-specific information. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides exact commands for running tests, concrete code examples for writing E2E tests, specific file paths, mock patterns, and a clear decision table for choosing test types. Everything is copy-paste ready and specific to this project. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Running Tests During Development' section provides a clear 3-step sequence, but lacks explicit validation checkpoints or error recovery guidance. For instance, there's no guidance on what to do if `npm run check` fails or how to interpret E2E test failures. The workflow is present but missing feedback loops. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill of this scope with no bundle files, the content is well-organized with clear sections (Two Test Suites, When to Use Which, Conventions, Running Tests). The table provides quick reference, and the structure allows scanning. It appropriately references the external `superpowers:test-driven-development` skill for TDD methodology. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- cloudflare/sandbox-sdk
- Commit
f03920a
- 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.