Loading...
Loading...
Found 31 Skills
Detects anti-patterns and code smells in .NET test suites. Use when the user asks to review test quality, find test smells, identify flaky test indicators, or audit tests for common mistakes. Covers assertion quality, test isolation, naming, flakiness indicators, over-mocking, and structural problems. Works with MSTest, xUnit, NUnit, and TUnit.
Test Isolation + Anti-Patterns audit worker (L3). Checks isolation (APIs/DB/FS/Time/Random/Network), determinism (flaky, order-dependent), and 6 anti-patterns.
Mutation testing to validate test quality before PR creation. Runs mutation tools, enforces 100% kill rate, reports surviving mutants with recommended fixes. Activate when validating test coverage, preparing pull requests, checking test quality, or when asked about mutation testing.
Review Playwright tests for quality. Use when user says "review tests", "check test quality", "audit tests", "improve tests", "test code review", or "playwright best practices check".
Use this skill when you need to review test cases for completeness, clarity, maintainability, and missing scenarios; triggers include 'test case review' and 'test case review'.
Test quality validation through mutation testing, assessing test suite effectiveness by introducing code mutations and measuring kill rate. Use when evaluating test quality, identifying weak tests, or proving tests actually catch bugs.
Comprehensive Test Driven Development guide for engineering subagents with multi-framework support, coverage analysis, and intelligent test generation
Identify and fix common testing mistakes across unit, integration, and E2E test suites. Use when tests are flaky, brittle, over-mocked, order-dependent, slow, poorly named, or providing false confidence. Use for "test smell", "fragile test", "flaky test", "over-mocking", "test anti-pattern", or "skipped tests". Do NOT use for writing new tests from scratch (use test-driven-development), refactoring architecture (use systematic-refactoring), or performance profiling without a specific test quality symptom.
Review the code quality of a spec-driven change. Checks readability, security, performance, and best practices before archiving.
Checks manual test scripts for harness adoption, golden files, fail-fast, config sourcing, idempotency. Use when auditing manual test quality.
Evaluate the output of a journey-builder run, identify instruction gaps, and edit the project root AGENTS.md (or add pitfalls to the gist) to fix those gaps. Does NOT modify the journey-builder skill itself.
Invoke this skill when a user shares test code and questions whether it actually works as intended — not to run or fix the test, but to evaluate whether the test has real value. Triggers on: "is this test any good?", "would this catch a real bug?", "this test always passes — is that normal?", "review these tests before I commit", or "does this test verify anything meaningful?". Also triggers when someone suspects a test is useless, wants a pre-commit quality gate, or is unsure if an auto-generated test is worth keeping. The core question this skill answers: "Would this test fail if the feature broke?" If not, the test gets rejected. Do NOT use for generating new tests, fixing failing tests, or exploring application features.