mobile-app-testing
Mobile app testing with unit tests, UI automation, performance testing. Use for test infrastructure, E2E tests, testing standards, or encountering test framework setup, device farms, flaky tests, platform-specific test errors.
77
72%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/mobile-app-testing/skills/mobile-app-testing/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
92%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 a strong skill description that clearly communicates its domain (mobile app testing), lists specific capabilities, and provides explicit trigger guidance via the 'Use for...' clause. The main weakness is potential overlap with general testing skills, though mobile-specific terms like 'device farms' and 'platform-specific test errors' help mitigate this. The description is concise and uses appropriate third-person voice.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: unit tests, UI automation, performance testing, E2E tests, test framework setup, device farms, flaky tests. These are concrete, actionable capabilities in the mobile testing domain. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Mobile app testing with unit tests, UI automation, performance testing') and when ('Use for test infrastructure, E2E tests, testing standards, or encountering test framework setup, device farms, flaky tests, platform-specific test errors'). The 'Use for...' clause serves as an explicit trigger guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'unit tests', 'UI automation', 'performance testing', 'E2E tests', 'flaky tests', 'device farms', 'test framework setup', 'platform-specific test errors'. These cover a wide range of terms a developer would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The 'mobile app' qualifier helps distinguish from general testing skills, but terms like 'unit tests', 'E2E tests', and 'performance testing' could overlap with web or backend testing skills. The mobile-specific terms like 'device farms' and 'platform-specific test errors' help but don't fully eliminate overlap risk. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
52%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill provides good, concrete code examples across multiple mobile platforms, making it actionable for writing individual tests. However, it lacks workflow guidance for test infrastructure setup, CI integration, flaky test handling, and device farm usage—all mentioned in the skill description. The best practices section is generic advice Claude already knows, wasting token budget.
Suggestions
Add a workflow section with sequenced steps for setting up test infrastructure, running tests, and interpreting results, including validation checkpoints (e.g., 'verify test runner is configured before writing tests').
Remove or significantly trim the 'Best Practices' and 'Avoid' sections—these are generic testing principles Claude already knows.
Add references to supplementary files for topics mentioned in the description: flaky test mitigation strategies, device farm configuration, and CI pipeline integration.
Include guidance on handling common failure modes like flaky tests, platform-specific test errors, and device farm setup, which are listed in the skill description but completely absent from the content.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient with good use of tables and code examples, but the 'Best Practices' and 'Avoid' sections contain generic testing advice Claude already knows (e.g., 'mock external dependencies', 'test both success and failure paths'). The testing pyramid percentages are also somewhat filler. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable code examples across four platforms (Jest, Detox, XCTest, Espresso) with concrete, copy-paste-ready test implementations. Each example demonstrates a complete test case with real assertions. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no workflow or sequencing guidance—no steps for setting up test infrastructure, running tests, handling failures, or integrating into CI. The skill presents isolated code snippets without explaining how to sequence testing activities or validate results. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is reasonably organized with clear section headers and a table overview, but everything is inline in one file. Topics like device farm setup, flaky test handling, and CI integration (mentioned in the description) are absent with no references to supplementary files. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- secondsky/claude-skills
- Commit
88da5ff
- 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.