CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

e2e-testing

Playwright E2E 测试模式、页面对象模型(POM)、配置、CI/CD 集成、产物管理以及不稳定测试(flaky test)策略。

62

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Medium

Suggest reviewing before use

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/e2e-testing/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

80%

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

A highly actionable, concise, code-forward reference with strong executable examples across the major Playwright E2E concerns. Its weaknesses are the absence of explicit validation/feedback-loop checkpoints in risky flows and a monolithic structure with no progressive disclosure via bundle files.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation/retry checkpoints to the risky flows — e.g., for the financial trade test, a 'verify preview → confirm → assert response status → on failure capture trace and retry' loop — to lift workflow_clarity.

Split large inline sections (e.g., the test report template, Web3/wallet testing) into reference files under references/ and link to them one level deep, keeping SKILL.md as an overview, to improve progressive disclosure.

Add a short 'Workflow' section that sequences the typical E2E task (organize files → write POM → write spec → run → diagnose flakiness → wire CI) with checkpoints, so the patterns cohere into a guided process.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and code-forward, leading with directory trees and executable snippets with minimal prose and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows (e.g., what Playwright is). It matches the level-3 anchor of a lean, efficient document where every token earns its place; it is above level 2 because there is no padding or unnecessary explanation.

3 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides extensive executable TypeScript, YAML, and bash — a full POM class, test specs, a complete defineConfig, a CI workflow, and a mock wallet provider — that is copy-paste ready. It matches the level-3 anchor of fully executable code with specific examples; it is above level 2 because the code is complete rather than pseudocode.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Content is organized as topical patterns with some loose sequencing (identify flakiness → causes → fixes), but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or validate-fix-retry feedback loops, including for the money-involved financial trade flow. The rubric caps workflow_clarity at 2 when validation/feedback loops are missing in risky contexts; it is above level 1 because sections are clearly organized and some sequence exists.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/scripts/assets are empty) and the skill is a single ~320-line monolithic document with no external one-level-deep references, while inline sections like the report template and Web3 testing could plausibly be split out. It matches the level-2 anchor of structured but with content that should be separate kept inline; it is above level 1 due to clear section organization and below level 3 because there is no overview-pointing-to-references structure.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

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.

A specific, well-scoped description that clearly conveys the skill's domain and capabilities, but it lacks an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause and leans on technical labels over natural user phrasing. Adding a 'Use when...' sentence would lift completeness and trigger-term quality.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' clause (e.g., 'Use when writing or debugging Playwright end-to-end tests, setting up E2E CI, or diagnosing flaky tests') to satisfy the 'when' half of completeness.

Include natural user-facing trigger phrases like 'end-to-end testing' and 'flaky tests' alongside the technical terms to improve trigger-term coverage.

Keep the capability list but consider leading with the single most common trigger ('Use when the user asks about E2E/Playwright tests') for clearer conflict-detection.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates multiple concrete capability areas — 'E2E 测试模式', '页面对象模型', '配置', 'CI/CD 集成', '产物管理', '不稳定测试策略' — matching the anchor for listing several specific concrete actions. It is above level 2 because it is comprehensive across six sub-areas rather than naming only the domain and a few actions.

3 / 3

Completeness

The 'what' is well covered by the enumerated capabilities, but the 'when' is missing — there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which the rubric caps at 2. It is above level 1 because the what is clearly and specifically stated.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Real relevant terms are present ('Playwright', 'E2E', 'Flaky Test', 'CI/CD'), but common natural variations users would voice are missing and several terms ('页面对象模型', '产物管理') are skill-internal labels rather than user utterances. It does not reach level 3 due to limited natural-phrase coverage, and is above level 1 because the keywords present are genuinely relevant.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is tightly scoped to 'Playwright E2E 测试', a clear niche with distinct triggers unlikely to conflict with unrelated skills. It matches the level-3 anchor of a clear niche with distinct triggers.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
xu-xiang/everything-claude-code-zh
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.