CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

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.

61

Quality

72%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/integration-e2e-testing/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

61%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 body is a thorough, actionable methodology for integration/E2E test design with concrete ROI scales, thresholds, and a skeleton template, and it correctly offloads E2E design detail to a single clearly signaled reference. Its main weaknesses are length that could be tightened and the absence of an explicit sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints for what is fundamentally a multi-step selection process.

Suggestions

Add an explicit numbered workflow (e.g., 1. enumerate candidates → 2. classify journey → 3. compute ROI → 4. apply lane thresholds/budgets → 5. emit skeleton) with a validation checkpoint confirming budget compliance before skeleton emission.

Tighten the ROI section: condense the unknown-value ordering prose and trim the 8-row examples table to the 3–4 rows that illustrate distinct outcomes (selected, below-threshold, deduped).

Move the detailed ROI threshold rationale, examples table, and naming-convention reference into a separate references file (e.g., references/roi-and-budgets.md) to keep SKILL.md a lean overview, mirroring the e2e-design.md split.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense and long (~250 lines); most content is domain-specific methodology Claude would not know (ROI formulas, budgets, thresholds), but the unknown-value ordering prose, the 8-row ROI examples table, and repeated rationale explanations could be tightened.

3 / 5

Actionability

Provides concrete, directly applicable guidance — exact ROI scales (0/5/10), the ROI formula, threshold tables, a copy-paste comment-annotation template, and naming conventions — though much of the selection logic is decision heuristics requiring judgment rather than pure executable code.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The methodology is implied across ordered sections (definitions → behavior-first → ROI → journey → skeleton → review) but is never presented as an explicit numbered workflow, and validation/budget-enforcement checkpoints are stated as rules rather than as feedback loops in a sequenced process.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Clear section headers and one well-signaled, one-level-deep reference (references/e2e-design.md, verified to exist), though a large amount of detailed reference material (ROI examples table, threshold tables, naming conventions) remains inline in SKILL.md rather than split out.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 is well-constructed: it states multiple concrete capabilities and pairs them with an explicit "Use when" trigger clause covering natural terms. It is third-person, concise, and clearly scoped to integration/E2E testing with only minor overlap risk from the broad "reviewing test quality" phrasing.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete capabilities ("Integration and E2E test design principles, ROI calculation, test skeleton specification, and review criteria"), but the actions are somewhat abstract (principles, criteria) rather than concrete operations like the anchor-5 PDF extract/fill examples.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ("Integration and E2E test design principles, ROI calculation, test skeleton specification, and review criteria") and when ("Use when designing integration tests, E2E tests, or reviewing test quality") with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say ("designing integration tests, E2E tests, or reviewing test quality") with good coverage, though the "end-to-end" synonym is missing alongside "E2E".

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear niche (integration/E2E test design) with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk, though "reviewing test quality" is broad enough to overlap slightly with general code-review or unit-testing skills.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
shinpr/claude-code-workflows
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.