Reviews test code to identify and fix common testing anti-patterns including flaky tests, over-mocking, brittle assertions, test interdependency, and hidden test logic. Flags bad patterns, explains the specific defect, and provides corrected implementations. Use when reviewing test code, debugging intermittent or unreliable test failures, or when the user mentions flaky tests, test smells, brittle tests, test isolation issues, mock overuse, slow tests, or test maintenance problems.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:rohitg00/skillkit --skill testing-anti-patterns96
Does it follow best practices?
Validation for skill structure
You are identifying and avoiding common testing anti-patterns.
Follow these steps when reviewing test code:
Problem: Test passes even when the code is broken.
// BAD - Always passes because it tests nothing meaningful
it('should process data', () => {
const result = processData(input);
expect(result).toBeDefined(); // Too weak
});
// GOOD - Actually verifies behavior
it('should transform input to uppercase', () => {
const result = processData({ text: 'hello' });
expect(result.text).toBe('HELLO');
});Detection: Remove or break the implementation - test should fail.
Problem: Single test covers too many behaviors.
// BAD - Tests multiple things
it('should handle user registration', async () => {
const user = await register(userData);
expect(user.id).toBeDefined();
expect(user.email).toBe(userData.email);
expect(user.password).toBeUndefined();
expect(sendEmail).toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(createProfile).toHaveBeenCalled();
// ... 20 more assertions
});
// GOOD - Focused tests
it('should create user with provided email', async () => {
const user = await register(userData);
expect(user.email).toBe(userData.email);
});
it('should send welcome email on registration', async () => {
await register(userData);
expect(sendEmail).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect.objectContaining({ type: 'welcome' })
);
});Fix: One test, one logical assertion concept.
Problem: Test breaks when implementation changes, even if behavior is correct.
// BAD - Tests internal implementation
it('should use QuickSort for sorting', () => {
const sorter = new Sorter();
const spy = jest.spyOn(sorter, '_quickSort');
sorter.sort([3, 1, 2]);
expect(spy).toHaveBeenCalled();
});
// GOOD - Tests behavior/output
it('should return sorted array', () => {
const sorter = new Sorter();
expect(sorter.sort([3, 1, 2])).toEqual([1, 2, 3]);
});Fix: Test what the code does, not how it does it.
Problem: Too many mocks make tests meaningless.
// BAD - Everything is mocked, test proves nothing
it('should calculate price', () => {
const mockProduct = { getPrice: jest.fn().mockReturnValue(100) };
const mockDiscount = { apply: jest.fn().mockReturnValue(80) };
const mockTax = { calculate: jest.fn().mockReturnValue(8) };
const total = calculateTotal(mockProduct, mockDiscount, mockTax);
expect(total).toBe(88); // Just testing mock arithmetic
});
// GOOD - Use real objects where feasible
it('should apply 20% discount to price', () => {
const product = new Product({ price: 100 });
const discount = new PercentageDiscount(20);
const total = calculateTotal(product, discount);
expect(total).toBe(80);
});Fix: Only mock external dependencies and side effects.
Problem: Test sometimes passes, sometimes fails.
Common causes:
// BAD - Depends on current time
it('should show recent items', () => {
const item = { createdAt: new Date() };
expect(isRecent(item)).toBe(true);
});
// GOOD - Control the time
it('should show items from last 24 hours', () => {
const now = new Date('2024-01-15T12:00:00Z');
jest.setSystemTime(now);
const recent = { createdAt: new Date('2024-01-15T00:00:00Z') };
const old = { createdAt: new Date('2024-01-13T00:00:00Z') };
expect(isRecent(recent)).toBe(true);
expect(isRecent(old)).toBe(false);
});Problem: Tests take too long to run.
// BAD - Real network call
it('should fetch user data', async () => {
const response = await fetch('https://api.example.com/users/1');
const user = await response.json();
expect(user.name).toBeDefined();
});
// GOOD - Mocked network
it('should parse user response', async () => {
mockFetch.mockResolvedValue({
json: () => Promise.resolve({ id: 1, name: 'Test User' })
});
const user = await fetchUser(1);
expect(user.name).toBe('Test User');
});Target: Unit tests < 100ms, Integration tests < 1s.
Problem: Tests depend on other tests running first.
// BAD - Tests must run in order
describe('User operations', () => {
let userId;
it('should create user', () => {
userId = createUser(); // Sets state for next test
expect(userId).toBeDefined();
});
it('should update user', () => {
updateUser(userId, newData); // Depends on previous test
expect(getUser(userId).name).toBe(newData.name);
});
});
// GOOD - Each test is independent
describe('User operations', () => {
it('should create user', () => {
const userId = createUser();
expect(userId).toBeDefined();
});
it('should update user', () => {
const userId = createUser(); // Creates its own user
updateUser(userId, newData);
expect(getUser(userId).name).toBe(newData.name);
});
});Problem: Test logic is hidden in helpers or setup.
// BAD - Assertions hidden in helper
function assertValidUser(user) {
expect(user.id).toBeDefined();
expect(user.email).toMatch(/@/);
expect(user.createdAt).toBeInstanceOf(Date);
// Many more hidden assertions
}
it('should create valid user', () => {
const user = createUser(data);
assertValidUser(user); // What is actually being tested?
});
// GOOD - Explicit assertions
it('should create user with email', () => {
const user = createUser(data);
expect(user.email).toBe(data.email);
});When reviewing tests, watch for:
Tests that:
7c8ba72
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.