CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/test-coverage-targeter

Builds a "what to test next" recommendation by combining a coverage report (LCOV / Cobertura / coverage.py JSON / Jest JSON / JaCoCo XML) with the PR's `git diff`, ranking uncovered branches by risk × cost - risk weighted by McCabe cyclomatic complexity and code-churn frequency, cost weighted by the unit-test pyramid layer (unit tests cheaper than integration than E2E). Emits a prioritized list with concrete file:line targets and the test layer recommended for each. Use when a team has the budget to write 5 - 10 new tests and needs help picking which uncovered code to target first instead of blindly chasing 100% coverage.

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, actionable workflow with executable code and clear sequencing; the only weakness is moderate verbosity from quoted reference prose and a long illustrative example table.

Suggestions

Tighten conciseness by replacing the quoted McCabe threshold and Fowler test-pyramid prose with a one-line pointer to the reference link, keeping only the actionable formula and layer cost table.

Consider trimming the Step 7 render example from a full 7-row table to 2-3 representative rows plus the column schema, since the structure is what matters and the full list is illustrative padding.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient and code-driven, but includes quoted reference prose (McCabe threshold convention, Fowler test-pyramid quotes) and a full 7-row illustrative render table that are explanatory padding beyond what Claude needs.

2 / 3

Actionability

Provides executable Python functions, concrete shell commands (radon cc, git log churn, coverage_targets.py invocation), a CI YAML snippet, and a concrete file:line output table — copy-paste ready rather than pseudocode.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Eight explicitly sequenced steps with guardrails (advisory-not-gating, CI pull_request guard, fetch-depth: 0 caveat, skip pragmas); operations are non-destructive so the missing validate-fix-retry loop does not cap the score.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist; the single SKILL.md is cleanly sectioned (Overview, When to use, Steps 1-8, Anti-patterns, Limitations, References) with one-level-deep, clearly signaled external/sibling references rather than nested bundle hops.

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 strong, specific description that names concrete inputs, outputs, and an explicit Use-when trigger. It uses third-person voice throughout and avoids vague fluff.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates concrete actions and specific input formats (LCOV / Cobertura / coverage.py JSON / Jest JSON / JaCoCo XML) plus a concrete output ('prioritized list with concrete file:line targets'), matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly states what it does (builds a ranked what-to-test-next recommendation) and an explicit 'Use when a team has the budget to write 5 - 10 new tests...' trigger, answering both what and when.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrasings a user would say ('coverage report', 'uncovered code', 'write 5 - 10 new tests', 'git diff') in an explicit Use-when clause; technical terms like McCabe complexity are domain-accurate rather than generic jargon.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The risk-x-cost targeting niche and 'instead of blindly chasing 100% coverage' framing distinguish it from generic coverage reporters and the sibling coverage-diff-reporter, with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for the wrong skill.

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

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Reviewed

Table of Contents