web3-testing
Test smart contracts comprehensively using Hardhat and Foundry with unit tests, integration tests, and mainnet forking. Use when testing Solidity contracts, setting up blockchain test suites, or validating DeFi protocols.
82
64%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
92%
1.19xAverage score across 6 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/blockchain-web3/skills/web3-testing/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description that clearly communicates specific capabilities (smart contract testing with named tools and test types), includes natural trigger terms developers would use, and provides explicit 'Use when' guidance. It is concise, well-structured, and occupies a distinct niche that minimizes conflict risk with other skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Test smart contracts comprehensively using Hardhat and Foundry with unit tests, integration tests, and mainnet forking.' This names specific tools (Hardhat, Foundry), test types (unit, integration), and techniques (mainnet forking). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (test smart contracts using Hardhat and Foundry with unit tests, integration tests, and mainnet forking) and 'when' (Use when testing Solidity contracts, setting up blockchain test suites, or validating DeFi protocols) with an explicit 'Use when...' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'smart contracts', 'Hardhat', 'Foundry', 'unit tests', 'integration tests', 'mainnet forking', 'Solidity contracts', 'blockchain test suites', 'DeFi protocols'. These cover a good range of terms a developer would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche: smart contract testing specifically with Hardhat/Foundry. The combination of blockchain testing tools, Solidity, and DeFi protocol validation creates a very specific domain unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
29%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill provides extensive, executable code examples covering Hardhat and Foundry testing, which is its primary strength. However, it is far too verbose for a skill file—it reads like a tutorial or documentation page rather than a concise skill reference. It lacks workflow sequencing, validation checkpoints, and any progressive disclosure structure, making it a poor fit for the SKILL.md format despite its actionable code.
Suggestions
Reduce content by 60-70%: remove boilerplate Claude already knows (basic Hardhat config, standard CI/CD YAML, basic test structure) and focus only on project-specific patterns, gotchas, and non-obvious techniques.
Add a clear workflow sequence: e.g., 1. Write unit tests → 2. Run tests → 3. Check coverage (must be >X%) → 4. Run fuzzing → 5. Fork mainnet for integration tests → 6. Verify contracts. Include validation checkpoints at each step.
Split into multiple files: keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with links to separate files like HARDHAT_PATTERNS.md, FOUNDRY_PATTERNS.md, and FORKING_GUIDE.md.
Remove the 'When to Use This Skill' section—it lists obvious triggers that add no value and waste tokens.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~300+ lines. Includes extensive boilerplate code that Claude already knows (basic Hardhat config, standard test patterns, CI/CD YAML). Explains common patterns like snapshot/revert and account impersonation at length without adding novel insight. The 'When to Use' section lists obvious triggers. Much of this is standard documentation Claude already has knowledge of. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | The code examples are concrete, executable, and copy-paste ready. Hardhat config, unit tests, Foundry tests, gas comparison tests, coverage commands, and verification commands are all fully specified with real syntax and real contract addresses. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no clear workflow or sequencing for how to set up and run a test suite end-to-end. The content is organized as a reference catalog of patterns rather than a guided process. No validation checkpoints exist—for example, there's no guidance on what to do when tests fail, no feedback loops, and no sequenced steps for going from setup to coverage to verification. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a monolithic wall of code examples with no references to external files and no layered structure. Everything from basic setup to advanced forking to CI/CD is dumped inline. The advanced patterns, Foundry tests, and CI/CD config could easily be split into separate referenced files. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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
- wshobson/agents
- Commit
70444e5
- 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.