test-driven-development

Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code

Quality

67%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%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.

The content is highly actionable with executable examples and a rigorously sequenced, well-validated workflow. Its main weaknesses are verbose emphatic repetition and a broken reference to a missing writing-good-tests.md file.

Suggestions

Create the referenced writing-good-tests.md (under references/) or remove the broken link so navigation does not dead-end.

Trim repeated emphatic restatements and consolidate the overlapping "Common Rationalizations" table with the "Red Flags" list to reduce token cost.

Move the detailed rationalizations table into a separate references file and keep the body focused on the cycle and checklist.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but it pads with repeated emphatic restatements ("Delete means delete", "Period.", "No exceptions") and the "Common Rationalizations" table largely restates the "Red Flags" list.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides fully executable TypeScript examples (retryOperation, submitForm), concrete verification commands ("npm test path/to/test.test.ts"), and Good/Bad pairs that are copy-paste ready and cover common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Red-Green-Refactor cycle is clearly sequenced with explicit MANDATORY verification checkpoints, feedback loops for error recovery ("Test fails? Fix code, not test"), and a final verification checklist.	5 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized with clear headers, but the one external reference — [writing-good-tests.md](writing-good-tests.md) — points to a file that does not exist (no references/ directory or bundle file is present), which is a broken navigational link rather than a minor gap.	3 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

57%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.

The description has a clear, explicit trigger clause and natural keywords, but it never states what the skill actually does, relying on the skill name to convey the test-first methodology. Specificity and distinctiveness are middling because the trigger is broad and the concrete actions are unstated.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "what" clause, e.g. "Write a failing test first, then minimal code to pass, then refactor — the red-green-refactor cycle".

Include core trigger terms like "test" and "TDD" so the description matches how users actually request the skill.

Tighten distinctiveness by scoping the trigger, e.g. "Use when implementing any feature or bugfix that warrants test-first development, before writing implementation code."

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ("implementing any feature or bugfix") and the timing action ("before writing implementation code"), but does not enumerate concrete TDD actions like writing failing tests or the red-green-refactor cycle, so it is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	Provides an explicit "Use when" clause (clear "when") but never states what the skill does (write failing tests first); the "what" is only weakly implied via the skill name rather than stated in the description.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural terms a user would say ("feature", "bugfix", "implementing") with good coverage, but omits the core natural terms "test" and "TDD" that users most often invoke this skill with.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The trigger "implementing any feature or bugfix" is broad and overlaps with general coding work, though "before writing implementation code" narrows it toward the test-first niche.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
relative_links	Relative link issues: 1 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: obra/superpowers
Path: skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md
Commit: b36e082

Reviewed: 4 days 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.