CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/go-unit-tests

Go unit testing with the stdlib `testing` package - `func TestXxx(t *testing.T)` convention, the table-driven idiom with `t.Run` subtests, `t.Parallel()`, benchmarks (`BenchmarkXxx` + benchstat), examples (`ExampleXxx`), native fuzzing (`FuzzXxx`, Go 1.18+), coverage (`-cover` / `-coverprofile` + threshold gating), build tags, `t.Helper()` / `t.Cleanup`, and `-race` CI. Includes framework choice (stdlib `testing` is the idiomatic default; Ginkgo BDD for Kubernetes-ecosystem projects via references) and test-authoring conventions (framework detection from go.sum + existing suite files, `_test.go` placement, `t.Errorf` vs `t.Fatalf`). References cover Ginkgo + Gomega and Go mocking (gomock, testify/mock). Use for any Go unit-test task: writing table-driven tests, benchmarks, fuzz targets, coverage gates, or CI wiring.

72

Quality

91%

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

86%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.

A well-structured, executable skill body: concise sections, copy-paste code, real offloaded references, and a clear step sequence. Trimming a few explanatory asides would push conciseness to fully lean, and an explicit validation loop could lift workflow_clarity further.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Go competence—no 'what is testing' filler—and each step is a minimal code block plus terse prose; minor asides like 'standard practice for any Go project with concurrency' are slight over-explanation that keeps it just below fully lean.

4 / 5

Actionability

Every step ships copy-paste-ready Go code and exact bash/coverage-gate shell commands, covering the common cases (table-driven, parallel, benchmark+benchstat, fuzz, coverage threshold, CI) with executable, complete examples.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Nine numbered steps form a clear learning sequence and the coverage-gate snippet exits non-zero on failure (a checkpoint); it stops short of explicit validate->fix->retry loops, but the skill is largely additive test-writing rather than destructive/batch work.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is a concise overview that pushes Ginkgo and mocking detail into real one-level-deep reference files (references/ginkgo.md, references/go-mocking.md), each clearly signaled via markdown links and enumerated in a References section.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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.

A high-quality, comprehensive description that names concrete capabilities and explicit trigger guidance with concrete phrases. The only minor gap is a few additional natural synonyms, keeping trigger_term_quality just below the top anchor.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates many concrete actions—'table-driven idiom with t.Run subtests', 't.Parallel()', 'benchmarks (BenchmarkXxx + benchstat)', 'examples (ExampleXxx)', 'native fuzzing (FuzzXxx)', 'coverage threshold gating', 'build tags', 't.Helper() / t.Cleanup', and '-race CI'—giving comprehensive, non-generic coverage.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers 'what' with a full feature inventory and 'when' via 'Use for any Go unit-test task: writing table-driven tests, benchmarks, fuzz targets, coverage gates, or CI wiring.'

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It uses natural terms users would say ('Go unit testing', 'table-driven tests', 'benchmarks', 'fuzz targets', 'coverage gates', 'CI wiring') plus synonyms (stdlib vs Ginkgo), though a few common phrasings like 'unit tests for Go' or file extensions are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped tightly to Go unit testing and explicitly distinguished from sibling skills ('rust-unit-tests', 'test-code-conventions'), giving a clear niche with minimal trigger conflict.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

Table of Contents