e2e-testing

Use when reviewing CI coverage, automated checks, or test strategy related to Implement end-to-end testing. Focus on whether the rule is continuously verified, not just documented.

Quality

62%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/e2e-testing/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is well-organized with excellent progressive disclosure to a real reference file, but it carries a redundant concept explanation, lacks executable code, and has no sequenced workflow with validation checkpoints.

Suggestions

Remove the opening explanatory sentence ('E2E tests catch integration issues that unit tests miss...') — Claude already knows what E2E tests are.

Add a minimal executable snippet in the Fix section (e.g., a Playwright login test using data-testid) rather than deferring all code to the reference.

Sequence Check → Fix → Verify as an explicit numbered workflow with a validation step confirming E2E tests run in CI and fail the build on regression.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean, but the opening sentence 'E2E tests catch integration issues that unit tests miss—verifying your application works correctly from the user's perspective' explains a concept Claude already knows, matching the level-2 'could be tightened' anchor.	2 / 3
Actionability	It gives concrete advice (data-testid selectors, Page Object Model, Playwright/Cypress, CI/CD artifact uploads) but provides no executable code in the body, deferring all examples to the reference, so guidance is incomplete rather than copy-paste ready.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The Check/Fix/Explain/Code Review sections give a clear task structure, but there is no sequenced multi-step workflow and no validation checkpoint (e.g., confirming tests run in CI and block the build on regression).	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	SKILL.md is a concise overview with a single, well-signaled one-level-deep reference ('see references/rule.md' for full details and code examples), and the referenced file exists, matching the level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

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 has a strong, explicit trigger structure and answers both what and when, but its capability list and trigger-term coverage are only partially specified and could overlap with adjacent testing skills.

Suggestions

Lead with a concrete capability statement naming specific actions (e.g., 'Reviews E2E test coverage, CI verification gates, and regression-blocking enforcement') before the 'Use when' clause to lift specificity.

Add common user variations as trigger terms — 'E2E tests', 'test coverage', and framework names (Playwright/Cypress) — so natural phrasings match.

Narrow the triggers to E2E-specific contexts (e.g., 'when reviewing whether E2E tests block regressions in CI') instead of the broad 'test strategy' to reduce overlap with sibling testing skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain and some actions ('reviewing CI coverage, automated checks, or test strategy') but stops short of a comprehensive list of concrete capabilities, matching the level-2 anchor rather than the multi-action level-3 example.	2 / 3
Completeness	It has an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause and a what-statement ('Focus on whether the rule is continuously verified, not just documented'), clearly answering both what the skill does and when to use it.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms like 'CI coverage', 'automated checks', 'test strategy', and 'end-to-end testing' are present, but common variations users would say (e.g. 'E2E tests', 'test coverage', framework names like Playwright/Cypress) are missing.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	It is tied to the E2E testing niche, but broad triggers like 'test strategy' and 'CI coverage' could plausibly overlap with sibling testing or code-review skills, so it is not yet a clear distinct niche.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: thedaviddias/Front-End-Checklist
Path: skills/e2e-testing/SKILL.md
Commit: 48405aa

Reviewed: about 9 hours 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.