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.
70
62%
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 ./skills/integration-e2e-testing/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
67%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 is functional and covers the basics with an explicit 'Use when' clause, which is its strongest aspect. However, the capabilities listed lean toward abstract concepts (principles, criteria) rather than concrete actions, and the trigger terms could be expanded to capture more natural user language variations. It occupies a reasonable niche but could be more distinctive from other testing-related skills.
Suggestions
Expand trigger terms to include common variations like 'end-to-end tests', 'API testing', 'test plan', 'test coverage', and 'testing strategy'.
Make capabilities more concrete by using action verbs, e.g., 'Generates test skeletons, calculates testing ROI, defines review criteria for integration and E2E tests' instead of listing abstract nouns.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (integration/E2E testing) and lists some actions (design principles, ROI calculation, test skeleton specification, review criteria), but these are somewhat abstract rather than concrete actions like 'generate test skeletons' or 'calculate test ROI metrics'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (integration/E2E test design principles, ROI calculation, test skeleton specification, review criteria) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when...' clause covering designing integration tests, E2E tests, or reviewing test quality. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant terms like 'integration tests', 'E2E tests', and 'test quality', but misses common variations users might say such as 'end-to-end tests', 'API tests', 'test coverage', 'test plan', or 'testing strategy'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Reasonably specific to integration and E2E testing, but could overlap with general unit testing skills or test automation skills. The mention of 'review criteria' and 'test quality' is broad enough to potentially conflict with other testing-related skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
57%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a well-structured reference for integration and E2E testing principles with good use of tables and clear categorization. Its main weaknesses are the lack of executable code examples (only annotation patterns are shown, not actual test implementations) and the absence of a clear step-by-step workflow for applying these principles. Some content restates testing fundamentals Claude already knows.
Suggestions
Add a concrete, executable test skeleton example showing the annotation patterns applied to a real test in at least one language (e.g., a TypeScript integration test with the required comment patterns and AAA structure).
Include a worked ROI calculation example showing how to score a specific test candidate and decide whether to include it.
Add a sequential workflow section (e.g., 'When designing integration tests: 1. Identify behaviors from AC, 2. Calculate ROI, 3. Write skeleton with annotations, 4. Review against criteria') with explicit decision points.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Generally efficient with good use of tables, but some sections like the EARS Format Mapping and Behavior-First Principle lists explain testing concepts Claude already knows well. The ROI formula and cost table add unique value, but the Quality Standards section restates common testing knowledge. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete annotation patterns and naming conventions, but lacks executable code examples. The test skeleton specification shows comment patterns but no actual test code demonstrating their use. The ROI formula is given but no worked example shows how to apply it to a real scenario. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The skill covers test design principles and review criteria but doesn't provide a clear sequential workflow for designing tests. The Implementation Timing column hints at sequencing, but there's no explicit step-by-step process with validation checkpoints for creating or reviewing tests. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clean structure with a clear reference to the Playwright E2E design file at the top. Content is well-organized into logical sections with tables and headers. The main file serves as an overview with one-level-deep reference to detailed E2E content. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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
- shinpr/claude-code-workflows
- Commit
2e719be
- 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.