Name: testland/test-code-conventions
Rating: 75.2 (1 reviews)
Author: testland

testland/test-code-conventions

Pure-reference catalog of test-code conventions: AAA structure (Arrange / Act / Assert), per-test single-responsibility, descriptive naming (`{sut}_{scenario}_{expected}`), assertion specificity, mocking rationale (state vs behavior, fake vs mock), fixture-coupling rules, and the magic-number / hard-coded-string anti-patterns; the E2E selector-priority and web-first-assertion conventions live in references/. Use as the shared rule book a test-code review cites back to, or as onboarding for what makes a test code-reviewable; to score a test's quality on weighted axes use test-design-scorecard, and for setup/teardown isolation specifically use test-isolation-patterns.

Quality

94%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

85%

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

The content is highly actionable and well-structured: executable examples, specific vague→specific mappings, a clear review workflow, and a clean one-level reference split for E2E material. The only weakness is mild verbosity in the verbatim test-double taxonomy and the slow-setup cost arithmetic, which restate concepts Claude already knows.

Suggestions

Replace the verbatim five-part Fowler taxonomy blockquote with a single-line pointer to the cited article plus the one convention-relevant distinction (only mocks insist on behavior verification).

Drop or condense the slow-setup cost arithmetic ('10 tests × 2s = +20s per CI run × 50 PRs/day = 1000s/day') — the '>1s setup is a smell' rule is sufficient without the worked multiplication.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is dense and mostly efficient, but the verbatim five-part Fowler test-double taxonomy ('Dummy objects...', 'Fake objects...', 'Stubs...', 'Spies...', 'Mocks...') and the slow-setup cost arithmetic ('10 tests × 2s = +20s per CI run × 50 PRs/day = 1000s/day') are explanation Claude already knows and could be tightened, matching the 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' anchor.	2 / 3
Actionability	Concrete executable TypeScript throughout — the AAA example, the bad/good single-responsibility split, the Osherove naming triple, and the assertion-specificity vague-vs-specific table — plus a full before/after worked example with named fixes, fully matching the 'copy-paste ready' top anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 7-step 'How to use' sequence gives a clear ordered review procedure ('Read the Act lines first', 'Check one logical assertion target', 'Judge the assertions and doubles', 'Cite the section when flagging'), and the worked example walks convention → finding → fix; this is a single reference process with no destructive/batch step requiring a validation checkpoint.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	SKILL.md is an overview and the E2E detail (§8/§9) is split to a real, one-level-deep file — references/e2e-selector-and-assertion-conventions.md, confirmed present — signaled clearly inline and again in the References section, matching the 'clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references' anchor.	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.

The description is specific, complete, and distinct: it catalogues concrete conventions, gives explicit use-when triggers, and cleanly separates itself from sibling scorecard and isolation skills. It is on the longer side but every clause names a concrete capability or trigger, so the verbosity is informational rather than padded.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Enumerates concrete capabilities — 'AAA structure (Arrange / Act / Assert)', 'per-test single-responsibility', 'descriptive naming (`{sut}_{scenario}_{expected}`)', 'assertion specificity', 'mocking rationale (state vs behavior, fake vs mock)', 'fixture-coupling rules', 'magic-number / hard-coded-string anti-patterns' — matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor.	3 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly answers what ('Pure-reference catalog of test-code conventions: ...') and when via the 'Use as the shared rule book a test-code review cites back to, or as onboarding ...' clause, satisfying both halves of the top anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Natural domain terms a user would actually say are well covered — 'test-code conventions', 'AAA', 'mocking', 'fixture', 'naming', 'review', 'onboarding', 'E2E' — rather than jargon-only phrasing.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (test-code conventions as a shared rule book) and explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling skills — 'to score a test's quality on weighted axes use test-design-scorecard, and for setup/teardown isolation specifically use test-isolation-patterns' — reducing wrong-skill triggering.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

4 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation