Loading...
Loading...
Found 60 Skills
Use when writing, fixing, editing, or refactoring TypeScript tests, especially slow or flaky tests, skipped or focused tests, happy-path-only coverage, missing boundaries, brittle fixtures, coverage gaps, or multi-concept tests.
Evaluates test quality using Dave Farley's 8 properties. Use when reviewing tests, assessing test suite quality, or analyzing test effectiveness against TDD best practices.
Verification-ladder R5 review dimension: the mutation-adequacy adequacy backstop. Runs the diff-scoped mutation gate, reads the carrier, and turns surviving / NoCoverage mutants into concrete 'write a test that kills <file>:<line>' follow-ups. Triggers: 'mutation adequacy', 'check mutation score', or /review on a HIGH-tier feature. The mutation SCORE is advisory by default (a config override is needed to block on it). The NoCoverage axis has its own real, functioning block-mode enforcement path under review.mutationEnforcement: block (default budget: 0 uncovered changed lines) — opt-in, same as the score's severity. The diff-scoped CI wiring runs in observe mode unconditionally pending a clean runner verdict; it is not yet a blocking CI backstop. Do NOT run full-tree mutation here (scope:'full' is deferred to R10/v2.12).
Test suite analysis. Use when asked to analyze, review, or evaluate a project's tests for quality, coverage gaps, and best practices.
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.
Red-green-refactor discipline. Use when writing new functionality.
Deep formal test smell audit based on academic research taxonomy (testsmells.org). Detects 19 categorized smell types — conditional logic, mystery guests, sensitive equality, eager tests, and more — with calibrated severity and research-backed remediation. Use for comprehensive test suite health assessments. For a quick pragmatic review, use test-anti-patterns instead. DO NOT USE FOR: writing new tests (use writing-mstest-tests), evaluating assertion quality specifically (use assertion-quality), or finding test duplication and boilerplate (use exp-test-maintainability).
Analyzes the variety and depth of assertions across .NET test suites. Use when the user asks to evaluate assertion quality, find shallow testing, identify assertion-free tests (no assertions or only trivial ones like Assert.IsNotNull), flag self-referential or tautological assertions (output equals input on identity/round-trip operations), measure assertion coverage diversity, or audit whether tests verify different facets of correctness. Produces metrics and actionable recommendations. Works with MSTest, xUnit, NUnit, TUnit. DO NOT USE FOR: writing new tests (use writing-mstest-tests), other anti-patterns like flakiness or duplication (use test-anti-patterns), or fixing assertions.
Use when the user asks to analyze code for test coverage, list what test cases are needed, or review testing strategy — WITHOUT generating actual test code.
Review EXISTING test code for quality, smells, and testability issues. Detects test smells across six dimensions — readability, reliability, diagnostic value, design, AI-generated, and coverage — analyzes testability of application code, and backs the qualitative smells with mutation testing. Use when: "review my tests," "test quality audit," "test smells," "testability analysis," "are these tests any good." Not for: generating new tests — use `ai-test-generation`. Not for: testing AI features in your product — use `ai-system-testing`. Related: unit-testing, shift-left-testing, coverage-analysis, ai-test-generation.
Test quality guard - prevents testing mock behavior, production pollution with test-only methods, and mocking without understanding dependencies.
Checks that test method and function names read as complete sentences describing behavior. Flags cryptic names like test1, testFoo, or abbreviated names that do not describe what is being tested. Designed to run on every PR. Do NOT use for test coverage, test structure, or non-test code.