test
Use when you need to run tests for React core. Supports source, www, stable, and experimental channels.
80
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
57%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 establishes a clear niche for React core testing with specific channel support, making it distinctive. However, it lacks concrete action verbs describing what the skill actually does beyond 'run tests', and the trigger terms could be expanded to include more natural user language variations.
Suggestions
Add specific actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Runs unit tests, executes test suites, filters tests by pattern, and reports coverage for React core'
Expand trigger terms to include natural variations like 'unit tests', 'test suite', 'jest tests', 'CI', or 'test failures'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (React core testing) and mentions channels (source, www, stable, experimental), but doesn't describe concrete actions like 'run unit tests', 'execute test suites', or 'debug failing tests'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Starts with 'Use when' which addresses the 'when' question, but the 'what' is weak - it only says 'run tests' without explaining what capabilities or actions are available. The trigger guidance exists but is vague ('need to run tests'). | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes 'tests', 'React core', and channel names which are relevant, but misses common variations users might say like 'unit tests', 'test suite', 'jest', 'run specs', or 'CI tests'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The specific mention of 'React core' and the four channel types (source, www, stable, experimental) creates a clear niche that is unlikely to conflict with generic testing skills or other framework-specific testing skills. | 3 / 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 well-crafted skill that efficiently documents React's test infrastructure with concrete commands and clear channel mappings. The content is lean and actionable, with good organization. The main weakness is the workflow section could benefit from explicit validation steps or guidance on interpreting and acting on test failures.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every line serves a purpose - no explanation of what tests are or how yarn works. The content is dense with actionable information and assumes Claude understands the tooling. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides exact yarn commands for each channel, concrete usage examples with patterns, and specific flags. Copy-paste ready commands with clear argument mapping. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 3-step instruction sequence is clear, but lacks validation checkpoints. No guidance on what to do if tests fail beyond 'report failures', and no feedback loop for fixing issues. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized with clear sections (Usage Examples, Release Channels, Instructions, Hard Rules, Common Mistakes). References feature-flags skill appropriately. Content is appropriately sized for a single file. | 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.
- 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.