CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

stand-ui-test

Write, fix, or review the browser journeys in tests/stand/ui/ — Playwright (Python, sync API) against a deployed Insight stand with a real Keycloak sign-in. Covers the governing UI-vs-API rule and how to justify a browser test in writing, accessibility-first locators, the page-object/flows split, manifest-derived expectations, URL/deep-link validation, and real browser downloads. Use for any request to write, add, fix or review a committed browser test in this repository — 'add a Playwright test for X', 'the UI test is failing', 'turn this scenario into a browser journey', 'add a deep-link or download regression' — and for anything under tests/stand/ui/. For HTTP contract tests use stand-api-test; playwright-cli is for driving a browser interactively at a prompt and for Playwright's own CLI — reach for it only when nothing will be committed under tests/stand/ui/; drive-ui is for looking at a stand by hand.

Quality

93%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

85%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.

A strong, deeply actionable body: executable code, exact commands with failure gotchas, a gated 10-step procedure with deliberate validation loops, and no filler explaining things Claude already knows. Its two weaknesses are rhetorical passages that could be trimmed for token efficiency and a fully inlined ~280-line structure with no reference files to split detailed catalogs and exemplars out of the always-loaded overview.

Suggestions

Move the worked-example block quotes (the two justification paragraphs and the three download-journey exemplars) into a references/ file (e.g. references/justifications.md), keeping only a one-line pointer plus the governing rule inline — this advances both progressive disclosure and token efficiency.

Split the cross-format download comparison details (normalizer behavior, aria-rowcount, CSV-vs-XLSX divergence rationale) into a references/downloads.md and keep only the decision rules ("save, parse, compare every format; assert the filename separately") in SKILL.md.

Trim editorial emphasis ("period", "That guard is not decoration", "The place journeys silently rot") and other rhetorical restatements of rules already stated — the rules land without the flourish.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and entirely repo-specific — no space is spent explaining concepts Claude already knows (Playwright, OIDC, page-object pattern are used, not taught). However, there are minor instances of editorial padding that could be trimmed: "A suffix and a non-zero byte count do not prove... period", "That guard is not decoration", "The place journeys silently rot", and the multi-line block quotes of shipped docstrings restate rules already stated around them. This fits the 4 anchor ("efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed"); not 5 because those rhetorical passages don't each earn their tokens, and not 3 because none of it is generic background knowledge.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance throughout: the sign-in snippet ("from .flows import sign_in / sign_in(page, base_url, session_for(\"dev_ledit\"))"), concrete locator examples ("page.get_by_role(\"dialog\", name=\"Git output\")"), a copy-paste manifest-derivation snippet with its guard, and exact run commands with gotcha callouts ("uv run --project tests --frozen playwright install chromium", "./dev-compose.sh test-stand test -k login --headed"). File-level responsibilities are pinned in a table. This is the 5 anchor — copy-paste-ready code and commands covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 10-step Procedure is a clear sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: step 1 gates on "Try to make it an API test first", step 2 requires a measured justification, step 9 requires "run headed once to confirm it fails for the right reason when you break the expectation deliberately", and "Run `stand-test-auditor` over a new journey before considering it done" supplies an external audit loop. Not 4: validation is not merely mentioned but given as a deliberate red-green check (break the expectation, watch it fail), which is the 5 anchor's "explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery".

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), so everything — the download/normalizer contract details, the locator-exception catalog, quoted exemplar docstrings, and run-mode notes — is inlined in one ~280-line SKILL.md. Section headers make it navigable and sibling-skill references (insight-stand, stand-scenarios, stand-test-auditor, quality-vector-tests) are clearly named, but content that belongs in reference files is inline, which is the 3 anchor ("some structure... content that should be separate is inline"). Not 4: at this length, splitting the worked-example quotes and the cross-format download comparison into one-level-deep reference files would materially reduce the always-loaded surface; not 2 because the file is well-sectioned and easily navigated, not a headerless dump.

3 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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.

An exemplary description: concrete capabilities, explicit quoted trigger phrases covering the natural ways users would phrase the request (including the path form tests/stand/ui/), and explicit routing rules that disambiguate three sibling skills. Third-person voice is maintained throughout, and although long, every clause is load-bearing — no fluff or buzzwords.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions — "Write, fix, or review the browser journeys in tests/stand/ui/ — Playwright (Python, sync API) against a deployed Insight stand with a real Keycloak sign-in" — and comprehensively enumerates capability areas: "the governing UI-vs-API rule... accessibility-first locators, the page-object/flows split, manifest-derived expectations, URL/deep-link validation, and real browser downloads". This matches the 5 anchor ("multiple specific concrete actions; comprehensive coverage") with no coverage gaps; a 4 would require a missing capability area, and none is evident.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: "what" in the first two sentences (write/fix/review browser journeys plus the enumerated coverage areas) and "when" via "Use for any request to write, add, fix or review a committed browser test in this repository" with concrete trigger phrases. This is exactly the 5 anchor pattern ("clearly and explicitly answers both what AND when with concrete trigger phrases"); not 4, because the when-clause is as explicit and specific as the anchor example.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural trigger phrases with synonyms and path forms: "'add a Playwright test for X'", "'the UI test is failing'", "'turn this scenario into a browser journey'", "'add a deep-link or download regression'", "anything under tests/stand/ui/". This is the 5 anchor ("comprehensive coverage of natural terms including synonyms and file extensions") — the quoted phrases are exactly what a user would type; a 4 would mean a common natural variant is missing, and none is.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (committed browser tests under tests/stand/ui/) with explicit boundaries against every adjacent skill: "For HTTP contract tests use stand-api-test; playwright-cli is for driving a browser interactively at a prompt... reach for it only when nothing will be committed under tests/stand/ui/; drive-ui is for looking at a stand by hand". Minimal conflict risk — the 5 anchor; not 4, because the disambiguation goes beyond minor overlap avoidance and actively routes each neighboring use case elsewhere.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

constructorfabric/insight

Path

.claude/skills/stand-ui-test/SKILL.md

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.