CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/mqtt-tests

Test MQTT v5.0 with Mosquitto broker in CI + paho-mqtt clients - QoS 0 / 1 / 2 delivery semantics, retained messages, Last Will and Testament (LWT), shared subscriptions ($share/group/topic), $SYS topic introspection. Critical for IoT, embedded, and M2M systems where wire-level guarantees matter. Also carries STOMP-over-WebSocket + AMQP 0-9-1 broker testing (Spring / RabbitMQ frame, ack-mode, and exchange/binding tests via Testcontainers) in references/stomp-amqp.md. Use when a product speaks MQTT, STOMP, or AMQP on the wire and QoS 1 / 2 redelivery, retained-message state, LWT, ack-mode, or broker-topology behavior needs a broker-backed test - including smoke-testing a new broker auth / ACL / persistence config.

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

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 testing skill with concrete broker/client setup and test code, clean sequencing, and real one-level-deep reference files. Main weakness is mild redundancy between the Worked example and Step 3, and the absence of an explicit test-failure recovery loop.

Suggestions

Remove or compress the 'Worked example' section since it rephrases the Step 3 test already shown in full - keep only the clean_start=True regression insight as a one-line note under Step 3.

Add a short 'If a test fails' note (e.g., check broker persistence_location, confirm unique client_id, verify clean_start=False) to give an explicit validate -> diagnose -> retry feedback loop and lift workflow_clarity.

Drop the QoS-guarantee table's explanatory 'Use' column or fold it into one line, since Claude already knows QoS 0/1/2 semantics.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly lean and code-driven, but the 'Worked example' restates the Step 3 QoS-1 redelivery test in prose and the intro/'When to use' overlap the description; trimming the worked example would push it to 5. Not a 3 because no concept-explanation padding and code is tight.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable, copy-paste-ready: GitHub Actions service block, mosquitto.conf, paho-mqtt v5 client setup, and complete test functions (test_qos1_redelivers_after_disconnect, test_retained_message_delivered_to_late_subscriber) covering the common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear 6-step sequence with cross-references to detailed Steps, asserts as validation, and an anti-patterns checklist; not a 5 because there is no explicit assert-fail -> fix -> re-run feedback loop. This is a testing (not destructive/batch) skill so the cap-at-3 rule does not apply.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Clear overview in SKILL.md with well-signaled one-level-deep references to references/lwt-shared-subs-sys.md and references/stomp-amqp.md, both verified to exist; advanced content is appropriately split out rather than inlined.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

100%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 dense, highly specific description that names concrete protocol surfaces, tools, and test scenarios with an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause. It is long but every clause earns its place rather than padding with fluff.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions and surfaces - 'QoS 0 / 1 / 2 delivery semantics, retained messages, Last Will and Testament (LWT), shared subscriptions ($share/group/topic), $SYS topic introspection' plus STOMP/AMQP 'frame, ack-mode, and exchange/binding tests via Testcontainers' - comprehensive and specific, not the level below which has minor gaps.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Test MQTT v5.0 ... + STOMP-over-WebSocket + AMQP 0-9-1 broker testing') and when ('Use when a product speaks MQTT, STOMP, or AMQP on the wire and QoS 1 / 2 redelivery, retained-message state, LWT, ack-mode, or broker-topology behavior needs a broker-backed test'), with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural terms users would actually say - 'MQTT', 'MQTT v5.0', 'Mosquitto', 'paho-mqtt', 'IoT', 'STOMP', 'AMQP', 'RabbitMQ', 'Spring' - including synonyms and tool names, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear wire-protocol-testing niche (MQTT/STOMP/AMQP with a real broker) with distinct triggers; minimal overlap risk with adjacent HTTP/webhook skills it explicitly differentiates from.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

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