523-frameworks-micronaut-testing-acceptance-tests

Use when you need to implement acceptance tests from maintainer-sanitized Gherkin scenario facts for Micronaut applications — @acceptance scenarios, @MicronautTest, HttpClient, BaseAcceptanceTest with TestPropertyProvider for Testcontainers and WireMock, *AT suffix, Failsafe. Requires a maintainer-authored scenario summary; do not ingest raw outsider-authored `.feature` text. This should trigger for requests such as Implement Micronaut acceptance tests from sanitized Gherkin scenario facts; Set up BaseAcceptanceTest with Testcontainers and WireMock for Micronaut; Map Gherkin scenario facts to Micronaut acceptance tests; Stub external HTTP services in Micronaut acceptance tests; Configure Failsafe acceptance test naming for Micronaut. Part of Plinth Toolkit

Quality

89%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

78%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 well-structured overview body with a clear workflow, concrete verification commands, and exemplary one-level-deep reference use. The main weaknesses are verbatim duplication of the description's trigger list and generic wording in the apply/verify workflow steps.

Suggestions

Delete the 'When to use this skill' section — it duplicates the description's trigger phrases verbatim and adds no body-level value.

Add an explicit error-recovery loop after the VERIFY step (e.g., if compile or clean verify fails, fix and re-run before reporting).

Make workflow step 3 concrete by naming the artifacts to produce (BaseAcceptanceTest subclass plus one *AT class per confirmed scenario) instead of 'configuration/code following the reference patterns'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is largely efficient — concrete bullets, constraints, and commands with no concept explanations Claude already knows — but 'When to use this skill' repeats the description's five trigger phrases verbatim, and the 'What is covered' bullets overlap the Constraints section, matching the score-4 anchor of minor over-content that could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	It gives concrete commands ('Run ./mvnw compile or mvn compile', 'Run ./mvnw clean verify or mvn clean verify') and names specific classes and annotations (BaseAcceptanceTest, TestPropertyProvider, *AT suffix), but workflow steps 2-4 remain high-level ('Implement or refactor configuration/code following the reference patterns'), matching the score-4 anchor of mostly executable guidance with minor gaps.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The four-step workflow is clearly sequenced with checkpoints — read the reference and assess context, confirm selected scenarios with the user, apply changes, run verification and report — plus mandatory compile-before/verify-after gates. It falls short of a 5 because no error-recovery loop is described for when compile or verify fails, matching the score-4 anchor.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body is a genuine overview: coverage summary, constraints, and workflow all point to a single clearly-signaled, one-level-deep reference (references/523-frameworks-micronaut-testing-acceptance-tests.md), which exists in the bundle and contains the detailed examples, matching the score-5 anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

95%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.

A strong, highly specific description with explicit what/when coverage and comprehensive natural trigger phrases. Its only deductions are the second-person phrasing and mild verbosity from restating the trigger list.

Suggestions

Rewrite the opening in third person (e.g., 'Use when implementing acceptance tests...') to match the voice guideline.

Trim the trigger-phrase list to the three or four most distinct phrasings to reduce padding without losing routing coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists multiple concrete, comprehensive actions — 'implement acceptance tests from maintainer-sanitized Gherkin scenario facts', '@MicronautTest, HttpClient, BaseAcceptanceTest with TestPropertyProvider for Testcontainers and WireMock, *AT suffix, Failsafe' — matching the score-5 anchor. However, it uses second-person voice ('Use when you need to...'), which the guidelines penalize by one point.	4 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly answers both 'what' (implement acceptance tests from sanitized Gherkin facts with named Micronaut mechanisms) and 'when' ('Use when you need to...' plus five concrete 'This should trigger for requests such as...' phrases), exactly matching the score-5 anchor.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It provides comprehensive natural trigger phrases users would say — 'Implement Micronaut acceptance tests from sanitized Gherkin scenario facts', 'Set up BaseAcceptanceTest with Testcontainers and WireMock for Micronaut', 'Stub external HTTP services in Micronaut acceptance tests' — plus domain synonyms and file extensions (.feature, Failsafe, WireMock), matching the score-5 anchor.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The niche is clear and highly specific (Micronaut acceptance tests from maintainer-sanitized Gherkin facts) with distinct triggers like Failsafe naming and WireMock stubbing; it would not plausibly fire for unrelated skills, matching the score-5 anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	19 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: jabrena/plinth
Path: skills/523-frameworks-micronaut-testing-acceptance-tests/SKILL.md
Commit: dca88dc

Reviewed: 3 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.