terraform-test
**WORKFLOW SKILL** — Write and run Terraform tests (.tftest.hcl). WHEN: "create terraform test", "write tftest", ".tftest.hcl", "mock provider", "test module", "test assertion". USE FOR: test files, run blocks, assertions, mock providers, plan-mode unit tests, apply-mode integration tests, test troubleshooting. DO NOT USE FOR: Bicep code, architecture decisions, deployment (use azure-deploy).
71
86%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%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 is an excellent skill description that follows best practices across all dimensions. It uses a well-structured format with explicit WHEN, USE FOR, and DO NOT USE FOR clauses that make it easy for Claude to select appropriately. The trigger terms are natural and comprehensive, the capabilities are specific and concrete, and the boundary conditions clearly distinguish it from related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: write and run Terraform tests, test files, run blocks, assertions, mock providers, plan-mode unit tests, apply-mode integration tests, and test troubleshooting. These are all concrete, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (write and run Terraform tests, assertions, mock providers, unit/integration tests) and 'when' (explicit WHEN clause with trigger phrases, USE FOR clause, and even a DO NOT USE FOR clause with alternatives). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'create terraform test', 'write tftest', '.tftest.hcl', 'mock provider', 'test module', 'test assertion'. These are realistic phrases a user would type when needing this skill. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche (Terraform testing specifically, not general Terraform or IaC). The DO NOT USE FOR clause explicitly delineates boundaries against Bicep, architecture decisions, and deployment, reducing conflict risk significantly. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%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-structured skill with excellent progressive disclosure and concise presentation. Its main weaknesses are the lack of at least one complete inline executable example (the canonical example is entirely deferred to a reference file) and the absence of a clear write-test-run-validate workflow with feedback loops for handling failures. The reference architecture is strong but the main body could be more self-contained for common use cases.
Suggestions
Include at least one minimal but complete .tftest.hcl example inline (e.g., a simple plan-mode unit test with assertions) so the skill body is actionable without requiring reference files.
Add an explicit sequential workflow with validation checkpoints: write test → run in plan mode → review output → fix assertion failures → run apply mode for integration tests → cleanup.
Add a brief troubleshooting section or feedback loop guidance for common test failures (e.g., assertion mismatch, provider version incompatibility) to improve workflow clarity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient throughout. It uses tables for quick reference, avoids explaining what Terraform or HCL is, and assumes Claude's competence with infrastructure-as-code concepts. Every section earns its place without padding. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides concrete CLI commands and assert syntax, but the canonical example is deferred to a reference file rather than included inline. The main body lacks a complete, executable test file example that Claude could copy-paste, relying heavily on external references for the actual working code. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The Steps section lists CLI commands but doesn't present a clear sequential workflow for writing and running tests (e.g., write test → validate syntax → run plan-mode → run apply-mode → review output → fix failures). There's no explicit validation checkpoint or feedback loop for handling test failures. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with a clear overview in the main file and well-signaled one-level-deep references to four specific reference files. The Reference Index table at the bottom provides clear navigation, and content is appropriately split between overview and detailed materials. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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.
- Repository
- jonathan-vella/azure-agentic-infraops
- Commit
05d7617
- 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.