Loading...
Loading...
Found 9 Skills
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).
Performs pseudo-mutation analysis on .NET production code to find gaps in existing test suites. Use when the user asks to find weak tests, discover untested edge cases, check if tests would catch a bug, or evaluate test effectiveness through mutation-style reasoning. Analyzes production code for mutation points (boundary conditions, boolean flips, null returns, exception removal, arithmetic changes) and checks whether existing tests would detect each mutation. Works with MSTest, xUnit, NUnit, and TUnit. DO NOT USE FOR: writing new tests (use writing-mstest-tests), detecting test anti-patterns (use test-anti-patterns), measuring assertion diversity (use assertion-quality), or running actual mutation testing tools.
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.
Writes behavior-focused tests using Testing Trophy model with real dependencies. Use when writing tests, choosing test types, or avoiding anti-patterns like testing mocks.
Detect test smells, overmocking, flaky tests, and coverage issues. Analyze test effectiveness, maintainability, and reliability. Use when reviewing tests or improving test quality.
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".
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.
Use when you need to review, improve, or write Java unit tests — including migrating from JUnit 4 to JUnit 5, adopting AssertJ for fluent assertions, structuring tests with Given-When-Then, ensuring test independence, applying parameterized tests, mocking dependencies with Mockito, verifying boundary conditions (RIGHT-BICEP, CORRECT, A-TRIP), leveraging JSpecify null-safety annotations, or eliminating testing anti-patterns such as reflection-based tests or shared mutable state. Part of the skills-for-java project
Write behavior-focused tests following Testing Trophy model with real dependencies, avoiding common anti-patterns like testing mocks and polluting production code. Use when writing new tests, reviewing test quality, or improving test coverage.