Name: integration-e2e-testing
Rating: 71.2 (1 reviews)
Author: shinpr

integration-e2e-testing

Integration and E2E test design principles, ROI calculation, test skeleton specification, and review criteria. Use when designing integration tests, E2E tests, or reviewing test quality.

Quality

86%

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

The canonical home for this skill is integration-e2e-testing in shinpr/claude-code-workflows

Quality

Content

86%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.

A tightly written, highly actionable skill body that gives concrete formulas, templates, and worked examples while offloading browser-harness detail to a single well-signaled reference. The main gap is turning the ROI selection flow's implicit checks into explicit validation checkpoints.

Suggestions

Refactor the ROI selection flow into a numbered checklist with explicit validation gates (e.g., 'Verify every ROI input has observed evidence before scoring; if any is unknown, run the value-input round') to push workflow_clarity to anchor 5.

Tighten the 'Unknown-Value Ordering' paragraph into a short ordered list to reduce the intricate prose and lift conciseness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Information-dense and assumes Claude's competence — no preamble explaining what tests or ROI are — but the ROI 'Unknown-Value Ordering' and evidence-recording prose is intricate enough that a few passages could be tightened, sitting just below lean/efficient anchor 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Fully executable guidance: a copy-paste-ready test skeleton annotation block, a concrete ROI formula (BV×Freq + Legal×10 + Defect, range 0–120) with exact 0/5/10 scales, a worked examples table, and explicit file-naming patterns cover the common cases as in anchor 5.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	ROI candidate selection is clearly sequenced (record evidence → assign values → rank → apply lane thresholds → enforce budget) with a feedback loop (return the missing input, then re-apply), but validation checkpoints are implied rather than enumerated as explicit verify gates, so it falls just short of anchor 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A well-signaled one-level-deep reference — 'See references/e2e-design.md for UI Spec-driven E2E test candidate selection and browser test architecture' — exists as a real file, with browser-harness detail appropriately split out and a clear top-level section structure, matching the anchor 5 example.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Description

87%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.

A strong, well-structured description that clearly states what the skill does and when to use it, with third-person voice and concrete domain triggers. Minor room to sharpen specificity with more action-oriented verbs and add synonyms like 'end-to-end'.

Suggestions

Reword capability nouns as concrete verbs (e.g., 'Design integration and E2E tests, calculate ROI scores, specify test skeletons, review test quality') to lift specificity toward anchor 5.

Add the natural synonym 'end-to-end' alongside 'E2E' in the trigger clause to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists several concrete capability areas — 'test design principles, ROI calculation, test skeleton specification, and review criteria' — but these are capability nouns rather than the vivid concrete verbs (e.g., 'Extract', 'fill', 'merge') of the anchor 5 example, so it sits just below comprehensive.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both 'what' (the four capability areas) and 'when' via a clear 'Use when designing integration tests, E2E tests, or reviewing test quality' clause with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor 5 example.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural trigger phrases present — 'designing integration tests, E2E tests, or reviewing test quality' — with good keyword coverage, though it lacks common synonyms such as 'end-to-end' and file/extension-style triggers, keeping it just short of anchor 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche — integration and E2E test design with ROI-based selection — with distinct, specific triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: shinpr/claude-code-workflows
Path: dev-skills/skills/integration-e2e-testing/SKILL.md
Commit: 9b7f687

Reviewed: 2 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.