CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

gate-tests

How to use the `@gate` / `@force-gate` test directives instead of `it.skip` or fake-green skip patterns. Use when a test is known-failing under some test-matrix dimension (dev mode, a bundler, an experimental flag like cacheComponents), when converting `if (isNextDev) return` guards or env-var `describe.skip` branches, when adding a condition to test/lib/gate/conditions.ts, or when keying a fixture's experimental flag on a __NEXT_TEST_AXIS letter. Covers directive choice, condition tiers, the test-axis fixture pattern, pitfalls, and verification commands.

Quality

94%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

92%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.

An expert-aimed decision guide with excellent actionability and a rare explicit per-state verification section with expected outputs. Its only weakness is repetition: the off-state cost calculus, the stale-gate rationale, and the use-offline example each appear more than once and could be consolidated without losing information.

Suggestions

Merge 'Is the off-state run worth its cost?' into the directive-choice cases 3–4, which already make the same points ('browser e2e time is considerable, so skip the run'), keeping the cost analysis in one place.

State the stale-gate rationale once (the intro's "fails the suite the day the 'known failure' starts passing") and reference it from the Pattern section instead of restating it as "the suite fails the day they start passing".

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense with repo-specific, non-inferable facts (condition tier lists, build-skipping semantics, pragma-attachment hard errors) and explains nothing Claude already knows, but the off-state cost calculus is stated three times — "browser e2e time is considerable, so skip the run" in item 3, item 4, and again in "Is the off-state run worth its cost?" ("For a new API the calculus flips: … so the off state costs almost nothing"), and the use-offline example and stale-gate semantics are each repeated. That is more than the 5 anchor's 'every token earns its place' but is trimmable redundancy rather than padding, so 4 rather than 3 or 5.

4 / 5

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable: copy-paste-ready verification commands with env vars ("__NEXT_TEST_AXIS=A NEXT_SKIP_ISOLATE=1 pnpm test-start-webpack test/e2e/app-dir/<suite>/<suite>.test.ts"), an executable fixture config snippet, concrete pragma examples, exact condition names, and real working-example directories ("test/e2e/app-dir/use-offline/", "test/e2e/app-dir/concurrent-router-queue/"). Specific examples cover the common cases, matching the 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The decision sequence is clearly laid out (numbered directive-choice cases → condition tiers → fixture pattern → pitfalls) and the "Verify a gated suite in every state it can run in" section provides explicit validation checkpoints with expected outcomes per state ("expect `○ skipped` at collection, no fixture boot", "expect `⚠ gated test failed as expected`"), plus error-recovery guidance in Pitfalls. This is not a destructive or batch operation, so no cap applies, and it matches the explicit-validation 5 anchor rather than the minor-gaps 4 anchor.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, and the body opens with a clearly signaled one-level reference — "Full reference: [`test/lib/gate/README.md`](../../../test/lib/gate/README.md). This skill is the decision guide" — keeping only the decision guide inline and appropriately deferring full detail. Sections are well-organized with no nested references and easy navigation, matching the clear-overview 5 anchor.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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 a model example: it states what the skill does in concrete terms, enumerates four explicit trigger scenarios a user would genuinely encounter, and stays entirely within its verifiable niche. Every capability it claims is actually covered in the body, so there is no over-claim.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions — "How to use the `@gate` / `@force-gate` test directives instead of `it.skip`", "converting `if (isNextDev) return` guards", "adding a condition to test/lib/gate/conditions.ts", "keying a fixture's experimental flag on a __NEXT_TEST_AXIS letter" — and every topic it claims ("directive choice, condition tiers, the test-axis fixture pattern, pitfalls, and verification commands") is verifiably present in the body. Comprehensive coverage with no gaps, so it fits the 5 anchor rather than 4.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers "what" (how to use the @gate/@force-gate directives instead of skip patterns) with an explicit multi-clause "Use when…" listing four concrete trigger scenarios. The explicit 'Use when' clause is present with concrete trigger phrases, so this is the 5 anchor, not the 4 anchor where the 'when' could be more specific.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains the exact tokens a user needing this skill would naturally say: "it.skip", "describe.skip", "known-failing", "dev mode", "a bundler", "an experimental flag like cacheComponents", "__NEXT_TEST_AXIS", plus the directive names themselves. Coverage includes the literal API names and their synonyms ("fake-green skip patterns"), matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor rather than the few-terms-missing 4 anchor.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Tied to a clear niche via distinct triggers — "`@gate` / `@force-gate` test directives", "test/lib/gate/conditions.ts", "__NEXT_TEST_AXIS" — that no generic testing or skip-related skill would share. Minimal conflict risk, matching the clear-niche 5 anchor rather than the minor-overlap 4 anchor.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

Passed

Validation

75%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 12 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 1 suspicious

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

12

/

16

Passed

Repository

vercel/next.js

Path

.agents/skills/gate-tests/SKILL.md

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.