CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/embedded-coverage-strategy-reference

Pure-reference catalog of code-coverage strategy for embedded C/C++: the criteria hierarchy (statement / branch / decision / condition / MC/DC), the gcov toolchain (.gcno/.gcda, --coverage), the LLVM source-based toolchain (llvm-profdata / llvm-cov), host-build vs QEMU-build instrumentation, MISRA-C:2012 and DO-178C structural-coverage expectations by safety level (DAL A maps to MC/DC), and report-format choices. Use when choosing what structural-coverage level to require and wiring gcov / llvm-cov into the build; physical .gcda retrieval from hardware is in hardware-in-loop-reference, QEMU machine flags in qemu-system-test-runner, and to author the embedded tests themselves use googletest-embedded-arm or unity-test-framework-c.

74

Quality

93%

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

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

85%

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

A well-structured reference skill with executable commands, a clear sequenced workflow, and clean one-level-deep references to real bundle files. Its only weakness is mild redundancy: the safety-level mapping is repeated in three body sections and partly duplicates the standards reference file.

Suggestions

Consolidate the DAL A/ASIL D -> MC/DC, DAL B -> decision, DAL C -> statement mapping to a single body location and defer the full per-standard table to references/safety-standards-and-formats.md to remove the triple restatement.

Trim the 'Safety-standard coverage expectations' body section to a one-line pointer to the reference file, since the same levels are already covered in 'How to use' step 1 and the reference matrix.

Consider moving the LLVM coverage-mapping region taxonomy (code/skipped/expansion/branch regions) into a reference file to keep the body focused on the choose-and-wire workflow.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and assumes Claude's competence (no 'what is coverage' padding), but the DAL A->MC/DC mapping is restated in 'How to use', 'On-target vs host', and 'Safety-standard coverage expectations', and that safety section overlaps references/safety-standards-and-formats.md, so it could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready executable commands throughout - 'arm-none-eabi-gcc --coverage -O0 -g ...', 'llvm-profdata merge -sparse raw/*.profraw -o test.profdata', 'lcov --capture --directory . --output-file coverage.info' - plus a fully numbered worked example.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 'How to use' section sequences a clear 5-step path (criterion -> toolchain -> instrument -> where to run -> produce lcov.info and gate), and the Worked example gives an explicit numbered build/run/report/gate sequence; coverage instrumentation is not a destructive operation so no validate-fix loop is required.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is an overview with two well-signaled, one-level-deep references - [references/gcov-flag-reference.md] and [references/safety-standards-and-formats.md] - both of which are real files containing the deep flag table and standards/report-format matrices that are correctly kept out of the body.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

12

Passed

Description

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.

A dense, third-person description that concretely enumerates the catalog's contents, gives an explicit 'Use when...' trigger with natural keywords, and actively disambiguates from sibling skills. It fully satisfies all four dimensions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete capabilities - 'criteria hierarchy (statement / branch / decision / condition / MC/DC)', 'gcov toolchain (.gcno/.gcda, --coverage)', 'LLVM source-based toolchain (llvm-profdata / llvm-cov)', 'host-build vs QEMU-build instrumentation' - rather than vague language.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (a 'Pure-reference catalog of code-coverage strategy') and when, with an explicit 'Use when choosing what structural-coverage level to require and wiring gcov / llvm-cov into the build' trigger clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Covers natural terms an embedded engineer would actually say - 'code-coverage', 'gcov', 'llvm-cov', 'MC/DC', 'MISRA-C', 'DO-178C', 'QEMU', 'structural-coverage' - matching the score-3 anchor's breadth of natural keywords.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear niche (embedded C/C++ coverage strategy) and explicitly routes adjacent concerns to sibling skills ('physical .gcda retrieval from hardware is in hardware-in-loop-reference, QEMU machine flags in qemu-system-test-runner ... use googletest-embedded-arm or unity-test-framework-c'), making mis-triggering unlikely.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

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

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Reviewed

Table of Contents