agentleFS
MasihMoafiMasihMoafi/skills/test-audit/SKILL.md

test-audit

Skill8 starsChanged 9 days agoMITView on GitHub

Invoke whenever writing, changing, reviewing, or sweeping tests: an authoring gate for new tests, an audit for low-value, implementation-coupled or duplicate tests, and layered verification for AI-generated code.

80 other projects use a version of this, 11 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use chips, redo and 9 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • udecodeSkill

    chips

    Run the project's suggested-task ledger, the chips. /chips alone brings this session's open tasks up to date: it applies what the ledger helper says, settles stale and split tasks, cards what can start and reports the board, and /chips all also takes the ship-list tasks and the ones no live session owns, and merges duplicate tasks across the board. Use for /chips, /chips offer, start or drop, \"what chips are open\", \"suggest a task for X\", \"update the chips\", \"clean up the chips\", \"which chips are stale\", \"is this chip still worth doing\", \"merge duplicate chips\", at the last hand-back of a run that offered a task, and whenever pstack would file a tracked issue, a follow-up, a reflect Backlog item or an out-of-band PR.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • Scylla23Skill

    redo

    Re-run the last routed task one model tier up (haiku → sonnet → opus → fable). User-invoked escalation when the previous result missed. Pass --dry-run to preview without running.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • Aetheria-Labs1Skill

    plan-page

    Plan one storefront page from strategy through final copy, section order, proof, offers, template direction, responsive layout, and production asset requirements. Stops at an approved execution-ready specification.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • SocialKit-APISkill

    video-transcripts

    Extract transcripts from social videos through SocialKit across YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, X/Twitter, LinkedIn, and direct video file URLs. Use when the user asks to transcribe, get captions or subtitles, pull the spoken text, or read what a video says, including one video or many at once. Returns full text plus timestamped segments. Not for posting, private accounts, or unrelated website scraping.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • clawdbotSkill

    pr-simplify

    Simplify your own change to its smallest complete fix. Use before opening a PR, before pushing large repairs to one, or when asked to shrink a PR or clean up slop.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • spitoglouSkill

    technical-documentation

    Create and improve technical documentation including architecture designs, PRDs, API docs, code explanations, and visual diagrams. Use when asked to document systems, explain codebases, create design documents, write PRDs, generate Mermaid/PlantUML diagrams, review architecture, write user stories, or create pull request descriptions. Triggers include "document this", "create a design doc", "explain this code", "write a PRD", "create a diagram", "architecture overview", "user story for", "PR description".

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 77 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    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:

    Before adding a test, answer all four.

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Read root and scoped AGENTS.md, then the whole test, its production owner, callers, siblings, overlapping tests, CI routing and history.

    line 39

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 77 edited versions of this file we could read. “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

Test Audit

Keep only tests that earn their maintenance cost. Two modes, one value bar: the authoring gate for every new or changed test, and the audit that sweeps existing ones. Optimize for confidence, not deletion count. The tdd skill defines a good test and the regression rule.

Authoring gate

Before adding a test, answer all four; a missing answer means wait:

  1. What observable behavior, invariant or independent contract does it protect?
  2. What credible regression makes it fail?
  3. Why does existing coverage miss that failure? Each contract has one owner test at the strongest boundary; another layer needs its own risk. Extend a table-driven case or shared fixture rather than adding a near-duplicate.
  4. Does it need a production seam (export, flag, wrapper, hook) no production caller needs? Then test at the real boundary instead.

A test that matches a junk pattern fails the gate unless the retention bar names the contract it alone guards.

Junk patterns

  • assertion-free coverage probes, self-comparisons, identity copiers;
  • copied fixtures, inventories, manifests or export lists; exact source, import or string greps;
  • private predicates or call shapes already tested at a real boundary; duplicate calls of one contract;
  • tests that only keep test-only exports, globals or wrappers alive; production code whose only callers are tests;
  • expected values produced by the code under test; mocks that implement the asserted behavior;
  • fixtures that supply what the owner should produce, or assert a store the path never writes;
  • capability tests that restate declared flags instead of exercising the delivery;
  • negative controls that pass for an unrelated reason;
  • names that promise more than the input exercises.

Retention bar

Keep a test that independently enforces a public API, protocol, config, migration, storage, security, platform, default, generated-code, package, release or architecture contract. Also keep observable call ordering, regressions with a credible failure mode, and a source check when it is the cheapest independent guard (it fails when the user-facing key, byte or path changes and survives a rename). Static or slow is not a reason to delete. A kept test that fails on the baseline may be a product bug: reproduce it and fix the owner.

Audit

  1. Read root and scoped AGENTS.md, then the whole test, its production owner, callers, siblings, overlapping tests, CI routing and history. Stay read-only until the evidence is in.
  2. For each candidate record: name and location; what failure it can detect; non-test callers of its seam; the stronger proof that remains; why it exists; what deletion it unlocks; risk and the focused command. A missing field means not ready.
  3. Edit one coherent batch: delete obsolete test-only seams and dead paths (no aliases), move kept regressions to their owners, consolidate repeated assertions. Prefer net-negative production lines; add no replacement that restates the implementation.
  4. Validate: run the smallest owner and sibling tests, the real script behind any removed grep, formatting and git diff --check, then the checks the repo requires. Never edit files a running test reads.
  5. Report: what went and why, false positives kept and why, the proof run, production versus test lines (git diff --numstat), follow-ups. Land only when authorized, one batch at a time.

Layered verification

Tests are one layer; stack cheaper ones before human attention, scaled to risk: deterministic guardrails (types, lint, tests, secret scans); a fresh-context LLM review; deploy-time flags, canaries and rollback; runtime traces and SLOs; then focused human review of intent and architecture.

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.