CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

adding-tests

analyzing a change to determine what tests are needed and adding them to the test suite

59

Quality

67%

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 ./.claude/skills/adding-tests/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%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 well-structured, actionable instruction skill with a clear sequenced workflow, explicit validation steps, and concrete codebase-specific conventions. It is concise for its scope and well organized, though entirely self-contained with no progressive-disclosure references.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient and codebase-specific (e.g. "*Tests.cpp", "Catch2", "*TestUtils.cpp") with only minor trimmable redundancy between the ALWAYS/NEVER lists and the body, fitting the score-4 anchor better than the score-3 anchor's "some unnecessary explanation".

4 / 5

Actionability

It provides concrete executable guidance — a real bash command (find src -name "*Tests.cpp" | xargs grep -l), naming conventions, and a copy-paste output template — with only minor gaps, matching score-4; it is not fully copy-paste-ready across common cases needed for a 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Analyzing/Writing/Output/Completion sections form a clear sequence with explicit validation steps ("ALWAYS run new tests to verify they pass", run regression tests with the bug still present), feedback loops, and a Test Strictness checklist, matching the score-5 anchor; destructive/batch cap does not apply since validation is present.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and all content is inline, but it is organized into well-signaled sections with clear headers and no nested references, giving good structure with only minor organization gaps, matching score-4; it exceeds 50 lines so the simple-skill exception to score 5 does not apply.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 concise and states a clear purpose, but it lacks an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause and omits common trigger synonyms like "unit tests" or "test coverage". It is reasonably distinct from other skills but would benefit from explicit invocation guidance.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when adding tests after a code change, fixing a bug, or when the user asks for test coverage/regression tests."

Expand trigger terms to include natural synonyms users say: "unit tests", "regression tests", "test coverage".

Broaden the capability list slightly (e.g. mention regression tests and randomized/fuzz tests) to raise specificity beyond two actions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain (test coverage) and two concrete actions — "analyzing a change to determine what tests are needed" and "adding them to the test suite" — but stops at 1-2 actions without comprehensive coverage, matching the score-3 anchor; it does not list the several specific actions needed for a 4.

3 / 5

Completeness

It gives a clear "what" (analyze a change and add tests) but provides no "Use when..." trigger guidance for when to invoke the skill, so per the judging guideline a missing explicit trigger caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes relevant natural keywords ("change", "tests", "test suite") but misses common variations users would say such as "unit tests", "regression tests", or "test coverage", fitting the score-3 anchor of partial keyword coverage.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The focus on determining and adding test coverage is a fairly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against general testing skills, matching the score-4 anchor; it is not generic enough to score 3 nor fully trigger-distinct enough for 5.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

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
stellar/stellar-core
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.