go-test-generator
Go Test Generator - Auto-activating skill for Test Automation. Triggers on: go test generator, go test generator Part of the Test Automation skill category.
35
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
93%
1.00xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/09-test-automation/go-test-generator/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
7%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 essentially a title and category label with no substantive content. It fails to describe what the skill does, when it should be used, or provide natural trigger terms a user might employ. It would be nearly useless for Claude to differentiate this skill from others in a large skill library.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Generates table-driven unit tests, benchmark tests, and test helper functions for Go packages.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to write Go tests, generate _test.go files, create unit tests for Go functions, or mentions golang testing.'
Remove the duplicate trigger term and expand with natural variations users would say, such as 'Go unit tests', 'test coverage for Go', 'write tests in Go', '_test.go'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names a domain ('Go Test Generator') but provides no concrete actions. It doesn't describe what the skill actually does—no mention of generating table-driven tests, writing test functions, creating mocks, etc. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is essentially absent beyond the name, and the 'when' is not explicitly addressed. There is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent guidance for when Claude should select this skill. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The trigger terms are just 'go test generator' repeated twice. It misses natural user phrases like 'write Go tests', 'generate unit tests', 'golang testing', '_test.go', 'test cases', etc. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of 'Go' and 'Test Generator' provides some specificity to the Go language testing domain, which somewhat distinguishes it from generic test skills, but the lack of detail means it could still overlap with other testing or Go-related skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is essentially a placeholder template with no actual instructional content. It contains no Go-specific guidance, no test generation code, no examples of table-driven tests or mocking patterns, and no concrete commands. It fails on every dimension because it describes what a skill would do rather than actually doing it.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable Go test generation examples (e.g., table-driven tests, subtests, mocking with interfaces) with complete code snippets.
Define a clear workflow: analyze source function → generate test file → run `go test` → validate coverage, with explicit validation checkpoints.
Remove all meta-description sections (Purpose, When to Use, Capabilities, Example Triggers) and replace with actionable content like a quick-start example and specific patterns.
Include references to Go testing conventions (e.g., `_test.go` naming, `testing.T`, `testify` assertions) and link to separate files for advanced topics like integration testing or benchmark tests.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler and meta-description. It explains what the skill does in abstract terms without providing any actual technical content. Every section restates the same vague information about 'go test generator' without adding substance. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is zero concrete guidance—no Go code, no test examples, no commands, no specific patterns. The skill describes rather than instructs, offering nothing executable or copy-paste ready. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow, steps, or process is defined. The skill mentions 'step-by-step guidance' and 'validates outputs' but provides neither. There are no sequences, checkpoints, or validation steps. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic block of vague descriptions with no references to detailed files, no structured navigation, and no separation of concerns. The 'Related Skills' section mentions a category but links to nothing. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Commit
3076d78
- 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.