unit-test-scheduled-async
Unit tests for scheduled and async tasks using @Scheduled and @Async. Mock task execution and timing. Use when validating asynchronous operations and scheduling behavior.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kit --skill unit-test-scheduled-async73
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
75%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is functional with a clear 'Use when' clause and specific Spring annotations that create good distinctiveness. However, it could benefit from more concrete action verbs and additional natural trigger terms that users might actually say when needing this skill.
Suggestions
Add more specific concrete actions like 'verify cron expressions, test thread pool configuration, validate task completion callbacks'
Include additional natural trigger terms users might say: 'cron jobs', 'background tasks', 'Spring async', 'timer tasks', 'delayed execution'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (scheduled/async tasks) and mentions specific annotations (@Scheduled, @Async) and actions (mock task execution and timing), but doesn't list comprehensive concrete actions like 'verify cron expressions, test thread pool configuration, validate retry behavior'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Unit tests for scheduled and async tasks using @Scheduled and @Async. Mock task execution and timing') and when ('Use when validating asynchronous operations and scheduling behavior') with explicit trigger guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant technical terms like '@Scheduled', '@Async', 'asynchronous operations', and 'scheduling', but misses common user variations like 'cron jobs', 'background tasks', 'timer', 'delayed execution', or 'Spring async'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The specific focus on @Scheduled and @Async annotations combined with unit testing creates a clear niche that is unlikely to conflict with general testing skills or other async-related skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid, actionable skill with excellent executable code examples covering the main async/scheduled testing scenarios. The main weaknesses are verbosity (some redundant explanatory sections) and the monolithic structure that could benefit from splitting advanced topics into separate files. The workflow guidance could be strengthened with explicit validation steps for verifying async test correctness.
Suggestions
Remove or condense the 'When to Use This Skill' section - Claude can infer appropriate usage from the content itself
Consolidate 'Best Practices', 'Common Pitfalls', and 'Troubleshooting' into a single concise section or move to a separate TROUBLESHOOTING.md file
Add explicit validation steps in the workflow, such as 'verify the CompletableFuture completed successfully before asserting on results' or 'check test output to confirm async execution occurred'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary sections like 'When to Use This Skill' that Claude can infer, and the 'Best Practices' and 'Common Pitfalls' sections contain information that's largely redundant with the examples already shown. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable, copy-paste ready code examples throughout. Each testing scenario includes complete service implementations and corresponding test classes with proper imports and assertions. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The skill presents testing patterns clearly but lacks explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops. For async testing which can have subtle failures, there's no guidance on verifying test correctness or debugging failed async tests beyond basic troubleshooting tips. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear section headers, but the document is quite long (~300 lines) with all content inline. Some sections like detailed Awaitility usage or error handling patterns could be split into separate reference files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
75%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 12 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
body_steps | No step-by-step structure detected (no ordered list); consider adding a simple workflow | Warning |
Total | 12 / 16 Passed | |
- 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.