agentleFS
Sign inStart free
JeremyMorganJeremyMorgan/code-review-skills/skills/testing-implementation/SKILL.md

testing-implementation

Skill15 starsChanged 5 months agoCC0-1.0View on GitHub

Evaluates test implementation and coverage, identifying gaps, weak assertions, and untested paths. Use when auditing test quality, coverage, or testing strategy.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    If no target path is given above, review the entire codebase.

    line 14
  2. Distinctive:

    Test pyramid adherence (unit > integration > E2E)

    line 36
  3. Distinctive:

    Prefer minimal, drop-in fix snippets over prose.

    line 61
  4. Distinctive:

    Do not invent files or functions that aren’t present.

    line 63
  5. Distinctive:

    Write this into a markdown file and place it in the audits/ folder.

    line 65

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Target: $ARGUMENTS

If no target path is given above, review the entire codebase.

Evaluate testing implementation for this software project

Analyze:

  1. TEST COVERAGE
    • Unit test coverage percentage
    • Integration test presence
    • E2E test coverage
    • Uncovered critical paths
  2. TEST QUALITY
    • Test naming clarity
    • Arrange-Act-Assert pattern
    • Test independence
    • Mock usage appropriateness
    • Test data management
  3. TEST PATTERNS
    • Test pyramid adherence (unit > integration > E2E)
    • Testing anti-patterns (testing implementation vs behavior)
    • Brittle tests identification
    • Test speed issues
  4. MISSING TESTS
    • Error scenarios
    • Edge cases
    • Security tests
    • Performance tests

Provide a test improvement plan with examples.

Provide:

A structured finding report

A scale of 1/10 on how important each finding is

Remediation: precise code-level fix or config change (snippets welcome) if possible

Constraints & style:

Be concrete and cite exact code locations and identifiers.

Prefer minimal, drop-in fix snippets over prose.

Do not invent files or functions that aren’t present; if context is missing, mark as Unable to verify and say what code would prove it.

Write this into a markdown file and place it in the audits/ folder.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

Check your setup, free