CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
PluginPublic

testland/workbox-tests

Use when a project uses or is adopting a Workbox service worker and its caching must stay stable across refactors or upgrades: recipe behavior, precache manifest injection, routes, expiration and cacheable-response plugins, workbox-window events, and choosing a cache strategy per route.

Quality

85%

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%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 highly actionable, well-sequenced testing skill: every step yields executable code, failures have explicit triage and a fix-oriented anti-patterns table, and detail is appropriately split into two real, one-level-deep reference files. The main cost is token efficiency — a duplicated CI section and a few concept re-explanations of Workbox modules keep it from being lean.

Suggestions

Merge the "In CI" and "CI integration" sections into one — they repeat nearly identical yaml for the same vitest + playwright steps; keep only the release-artifact gating paragraph as added guidance.

Trim re-explanations of concepts Claude already knows, e.g. the descriptions of what workbox-window and precacheAndRoute() do in Steps 3 and 5, keeping only the pinned default values that serve as test invariants.

Consolidate the version pin ("v7.4.1, released May 2026") and the per-recipe default numbers into a single clearly labeled versioning note so time-sensitive details are isolated from the evergreen instructions.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient — executable code, tight decision tables, and a useful anti-patterns table — but the near-identical CI yaml appears in both "In CI" and "CI integration", and a few sentences re-explain what workbox-window and precacheAndRoute() are, concepts Claude largely already knows. This matches anchor 3's "includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened" better than anchor 4's "minor instances".

3 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable throughout: install commands, a complete Vitest spec for the __WB_MANIFEST assertion, complete Playwright tests for imageCache()/workbox-window events/CacheableResponsePlugin, exact run commands, and CI yaml; the remaining five recipe tests are offloaded to a real references file. Copy-paste ready with the common cases covered.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1–6 are clearly sequenced with a decision table placing each assertion type in the right runner; the tests themselves act as validation checkpoints, "Parsing results" provides failure triage ("When an assertion fails on the cache-content surface, also check the namespace name"), and the Anti-patterns table is a why-it-fails→fix checklist (async ExpirationPlugin pruning, empty first-load cache). This matches anchor 5's explicit validation with feedback loops and checklists.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Clear overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep references: references/recipe-tests.md and references/cache-strategy-design.md both exist, are well-structured, and do not chain further references; the body links them at the right decision points (Choosing a cache strategy, Step 4) while keeping core authoring steps inline. Easy navigation across Overview, When to use, Authoring, Running, Parsing results, Anti-patterns, and Limitations.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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 strong, Workbox-specific description with an explicit and well-qualified trigger clause and a concrete list of subject areas. Its main weakness is that the skill's actual capability (writing tests that pin caching behavior) is only implied by "must stay stable" rather than stated as an explicit action. Trigger-term coverage is good but misses a few natural variants.

Suggestions

State the capability explicitly with a verb phrase, e.g. "Writes Playwright/Vitest tests that pin the behavior of a Workbox service worker...", so the 'what' is explicit rather than inferred from "must stay stable".

Add natural trigger variants such as "PWA" or "service worker caching tests" to broaden the keyword coverage toward anchor 5.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several specific items — "recipe behavior, precache manifest injection, routes, expiration and cacheable-response plugins, workbox-window events, and choosing a cache strategy per route" — but they are subject-area nouns rather than actions the skill performs; the verb (test/assert) is never stated, leaving minor gaps versus anchor 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit and specific ("Use when a project uses or is adopting a Workbox service worker and its caching must stay stable across refactors or upgrades"), but the 'what' — writing/running tests — is only implied by "must stay stable" rather than explicitly stated, so it does not clearly meet anchor 5's explicit what-and-while standard; it is well above anchor 3's weak/implied 'when'.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases a Workbox user would say are well covered ("Workbox service worker", "caching", "refactors or upgrades", "precache manifest", "recipe", "cache strategy"), but a few common variants like "PWA" or "service worker caching tests" are missing, short of anchor 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description occupies a clear niche ("Workbox service worker", "precache manifest injection", "workbox-window events") with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk, distinguishing it even from generic service-worker testing skills.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

On this page