testing-typescript
TypeScript testing with Vitest/Jest: file structure, mocking strategy, async patterns, and coverage targets
54
60%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/testing-typescript/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
32%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 identifies a clear domain (TypeScript testing with Vitest/Jest) and lists relevant topic areas, but it reads more like a table of contents than an actionable skill description. It lacks concrete actions (verbs describing what the skill does) and entirely omits a 'Use when...' clause, making it difficult for Claude to know precisely when to select this skill over others.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to write, debug, or configure tests using Vitest or Jest in a TypeScript project.'
Replace topic nouns with concrete action phrases, e.g., 'Generates test files following project conventions, creates mock implementations, handles async test patterns, and configures coverage thresholds.'
Include additional natural trigger terms users might say, such as 'unit test', 'test suite', 'describe block', 'spy', 'stub', or '.test.ts files'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (TypeScript testing) and some areas (file structure, mocking strategy, async patterns, coverage targets), but these are topic areas rather than concrete actions. It doesn't list specific actions like 'write unit tests', 'configure test runners', or 'generate mock implementations'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes the 'what' at a topic level but completely lacks any 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance. There is no 'Use when...' or equivalent, which per the rubric should cap completeness at 2, and since the 'what' is also weak (topics not actions), this scores a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant keywords like 'Vitest', 'Jest', 'TypeScript', 'testing', 'mocking', and 'coverage' which users might naturally mention. However, it misses common variations like 'unit test', 'test suite', 'test file', 'describe/it blocks', 'spy', or 'stub'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of specific frameworks (Vitest/Jest) and TypeScript helps distinguish it from generic coding skills, but 'testing' is broad enough that it could overlap with other testing-related skills (e.g., integration testing, E2E testing, or general code quality skills). | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a strong, concise testing skill that provides actionable, executable guidance across all key testing concerns. Its main weakness is the lack of an explicit end-to-end workflow tying the sections together (e.g., a sequence for writing, running, and validating tests). Overall it's well-structured and token-efficient.
Suggestions
Add a brief workflow section (3-5 steps) showing the sequence: write test → run `vitest run` → check output → run `vitest run --coverage` → verify coverage meets targets, to improve workflow clarity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Every section is lean and informative. No unnecessary explanations of what testing is or how frameworks work. The brief framework recommendation ('fast, native ESM, Jest-compatible API') justifies the choice without over-explaining. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | All code examples are executable TypeScript with real imports and assertions. The mocking section covers module mocks, spies, timer control, and cleanup — all copy-paste ready. Commands like `vitest run --coverage` are concrete. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The skill covers individual testing concerns well (structure, mocking, async, coverage) but doesn't present a clear end-to-end workflow for writing and validating tests. There's no explicit sequence like 'write test → run → check coverage → fix gaps' with validation checkpoints. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | For a skill under 50 lines with no need for external references, the content is well-organized into clearly labeled sections that progress logically from framework choice through file conventions, structure, mocking, async patterns, and coverage targets. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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
- ucdavis/ai-skills-registry
- Commit
c0b2e4b
- 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.