tdg-personal/perl-testing
Perl testing patterns using Test2::V0, Test::More, prove runner, mocking, coverage with Devel::Cover, and TDD methodology.
72
72%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
54%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 effectively identifies its niche within Perl testing by naming specific frameworks and tools, making it highly distinctive and rich in trigger terms. However, it reads more like a topic list than an actionable skill description—it lacks concrete actions (verbs describing what it does) and entirely omits a 'Use when...' clause to guide skill selection.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to write Perl tests, set up a test suite, configure code coverage, or apply TDD in a Perl project.'
Rewrite with concrete action verbs, e.g., 'Writes and organizes Perl test suites using Test2::V0 and Test::More, runs tests with prove, sets up mocking, and configures code coverage with Devel::Cover.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Perl testing) and lists several specific tools/frameworks (Test2::V0, Test::More, prove, Devel::Cover, mocking, TDD), but doesn't describe concrete actions like 'write tests', 'generate test files', or 'configure coverage reports'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes 'what' at a topic level (Perl testing patterns and tools) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when...' caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also weak (topics rather than actions), warranting a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords a user would mention: 'Perl', 'testing', 'Test2::V0', 'Test::More', 'prove', 'mocking', 'coverage', 'Devel::Cover', 'TDD'. These are the exact terms a Perl developer would use when seeking testing help. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The combination of Perl-specific testing frameworks (Test2::V0, Test::More, prove, Devel::Cover) creates a very clear niche that is unlikely to conflict with other skills. These are highly specific to the Perl ecosystem. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid, highly actionable Perl testing skill with excellent executable code examples and clear workflow guidance. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (explanatory text that Claude doesn't need, like describing what Test2 is or listing its benefits) and being a long monolithic document that could benefit from splitting detailed reference material into separate files. The quick reference table and common pitfalls sections are particularly well done.
Suggestions
Remove explanatory prose Claude already knows (e.g., 'Why Test2?' section, descriptions of what Test::More and Test2::V0 are) to improve conciseness.
Split detailed Test::More and Test2::V0 reference sections into separate files (e.g., TEST_MORE.md, TEST2.md) and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with links.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is fairly comprehensive but includes some unnecessary explanations (e.g., 'The standard Perl testing module — widely used, ships with core', 'Test2::V0 is the modern replacement for Test::More — richer assertions, better diagnostics, and extensible', the 'Why Test2?' section listing benefits Claude already knows). The best practices DO/DON'T lists are somewhat verbose. However, most content is code-heavy and useful. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Excellent actionability throughout — nearly every section contains fully executable, copy-paste-ready code examples with proper imports, complete prove commands with flags explained by usage, and concrete patterns for mocking, fixtures, coverage, and exception testing. The quick reference table is immediately usable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The TDD workflow is clearly sequenced (RED-GREEN-REFACTOR) with concrete steps. The coverage workflow has step-by-step commands including CI threshold checking. The directory structure provides clear organizational guidance. Validation is implicit in the TDD cycle (run tests to verify), which is appropriate for testing workflows. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a single monolithic file at ~350 lines covering Test::More, Test2::V0, prove, mocking, coverage, fixtures, best practices, pitfalls, and quick reference. While well-organized with clear headers, the Test::More fundamentals and Test2::V0 sections could be split into separate reference files, with SKILL.md serving as an overview pointing to them. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
Reviewed
Table of Contents