agentleFS
Sagargupta16Sagargupta16/claude-code-recipes/skills/testing-strategy/SKILL.md

testing-strategy

Skill8 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub

Testing approach covering unit/integration/e2e split, what to test, AAA test structure, mocking strategies, and coverage targets. Use when writing tests, planning test coverage, or reviewing test quality.

  • Reads credentials

54 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use api-contract-design, deploy-checklist and 8 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.
  • MohOneXSkill

    api-contract-design

    Designs and reviews API contracts (REST, RPC, GraphQL, library interfaces) for evolvability, backward compatibility, and failure semantics. Use when defining new endpoints/interfaces, versioning an API, reviewing a schema, or deciding how breaking changes propagate to clients.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AnthropicSkill

    deploy-checklist

    Pre-deployment verification checklist. Use when about to ship a release, deploying a change with database migrations or feature flags, verifying CI status and approvals before going to production, or documenting rollback triggers ahead of time.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • AnthropicSkill

    tech-debt

    Identify, categorize, and prioritize technical debt. Trigger with "tech debt", "technical debt audit", "what should we refactor", "code health", or when the user asks about code quality, refactoring priorities, or maintenance backlog.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    error-handling

    统一错误处理系统。在添加 API 端点、修改错误处理、添加前端 API 调用、编写错误相关测试时使用。

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • Microsoft AzureSkill

    release-readiness

    Complete ODIN release documentation and validation checks before declaring user-visible work complete, preparing a release, or opening the Release-to-main pull request.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    deep-review

    Multi-agent deep code review for regorus. Three diverse parallel discovery agents with context asymmetry, risk-triggered micro-passes, adversarial gap-finder, and verification with disproval mandates. Use for high-stakes changes.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +4 more from anthropics

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 44 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    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:

    Follow the testing pyramid -- more unit tests, fewer integration tests, even fewer e2e tests:

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Every test should follow Arrange, Act, Assert:

    line 53
  3. Distinctive:

    Prefer lighter mocking techniques when possible:

    line 106

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 44 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

Testing Strategy

Testing approach: unit/integration/e2e split, what to test, test structure (AAA pattern), mocking strategies, and coverage targets.

Testing Pyramid

Follow the testing pyramid -- more unit tests, fewer integration tests, even fewer e2e tests:

        /  E2E  \           ~5%   -- Critical user journeys
       /----------\
      / Integration \       ~20%  -- Module boundaries, API contracts
     /----------------\
    /    Unit Tests     \   ~75%  -- Functions, components, utilities
   /____________________\
LevelSpeedScopeQuantity
UnitFast (ms)Single function/componentMany
IntegrationMedium (seconds)Module interactions, DB, APISome
E2ESlow (seconds-minutes)Full user flowsFew

What to Test

Always Test

  • Business logic and calculations
  • Data transformations and mappings
  • Validation rules
  • Error handling paths
  • Edge cases: empty inputs, boundary values, null/undefined
  • Public API of modules (exported functions)
  • State transitions (reducers, state machines)
  • Critical user journeys (e2e)

Don't Test

  • Third-party library internals
  • Simple getters/setters with no logic
  • Framework boilerplate (constructor, lifecycle method existence)
  • Implementation details (private methods, internal state shape)
  • Constants and configuration values
  • CSS styling (use visual regression tools instead)

Test Structure -- AAA Pattern

Every test should follow Arrange, Act, Assert:

describe("OrderService", () => {
  describe("calculateTotal", () => {
    it("applies percentage discount to subtotal", () => {
      // Arrange
      const items = [
        { name: "Widget", price: 25.00, quantity: 2 },
        { name: "Gadget", price: 15.00, quantity: 1 },
      ];
      const discount = { type: "percentage", value: 10 };

      // Act
      const total = calculateTotal(items, discount);

      // Assert
      expect(total).toBe(58.50); // (50 + 15) * 0.90
    });
  });
});

Naming Rules

  1. Describe blocks name the unit -- describe("OrderService"), describe("calculateTotal")
  2. Test names describe the behavior -- it("applies percentage discount to subtotal")
  3. Use the pattern: it("<expected behavior> when <condition>")
  4. Don't start with "should" -- it("returns null for invalid input") not it("should return null...")

Structure Rules

  1. One assertion per test (conceptual, not literal -- multiple expect calls are fine if testing one behavior)
  2. No logic in tests -- no if, for, or switch in test code
  3. No test interdependencies -- each test sets up and tears down its own state
  4. Use beforeEach for shared setup, not beforeAll -- isolation matters more than speed
  5. Group related tests with nested describe blocks

Mocking Strategies

When to Mock

MockDon't Mock
External APIs and servicesThe unit under test
Database calls (in unit tests)Simple utility functions
File system accessData transformations
Timers and datesPure functions
Network requestsCollaborators (in integration tests)
Third-party servicesStandard library methods

Mocking Hierarchy

Prefer lighter mocking techniques when possible:

  1. Stubs -- return a fixed value: jest.fn().mockReturnValue(42)
  2. Spies -- observe calls without changing behavior: jest.spyOn(service, 'save')
  3. Fakes -- lightweight in-memory implementation: new InMemoryUserRepository()
  4. Mocks -- full behavior replacement: jest.mock('./database')

Rules

  1. Mock at the boundary -- mock the database client, not the repository method
  2. Don't mock what you don't own -- wrap third-party APIs in your own adapter, mock the adapter
  3. Reset mocks between tests -- use afterEach(() => jest.restoreAllMocks())
  4. Verify interactions sparingly -- prefer asserting on output over asserting mock was called
// Good -- mock at the boundary
const mockDb = { query: jest.fn().mockResolvedValue([{ id: 1, name: "Alice" }]) };
const repo = new UserRepository(mockDb);
const user = await repo.findById(1);
expect(user.name).toBe("Alice");

// Bad -- mocking the unit under test
jest.spyOn(repo, "findById").mockResolvedValue({ id: 1, name: "Alice" });

Test Doubles for Common Scenarios

// Fixed time
beforeEach(() => {
  jest.useFakeTimers();
  jest.setSystemTime(new Date("2025-06-15T12:00:00Z"));
});
afterEach(() => jest.useRealTimers());

// API responses
const mockFetch = jest.fn().mockResolvedValue({
  ok: true,
  json: async () => ({ data: { id: 1 } }),
});
global.fetch = mockFetch;

// Environment variables
const originalEnv = process.env;
beforeEach(() => {
  process.env = { ...originalEnv, API_KEY: "test-key" };
});
afterEach(() => {
  process.env = originalEnv;
});

Integration Tests

  1. Test module boundaries -- service calls repository, repository calls database
  2. Use a real (test) database -- SQLite in-memory or Docker containers
  3. Test API endpoints end-to-end -- use supertest or similar
  4. Seed data in beforeEach -- don't rely on database state from other tests
  5. Test error paths -- connection failures, timeouts, constraint violations
describe("POST /api/users", () => {
  it("creates a user and returns 201", async () => {
    const response = await request(app)
      .post("/api/users")
      .send({ email: "test@example.com", name: "Test User" })
      .expect(201);

    expect(response.body.data).toMatchObject({
      email: "test@example.com",
      name: "Test User",
    });
    expect(response.body.data.id).toBeDefined();
  });

  it("returns 400 for invalid email", async () => {
    const response = await request(app)
      .post("/api/users")
      .send({ email: "not-an-email", name: "Test User" })
      .expect(400);

    expect(response.body.error.code).toBe("VALIDATION_ERROR");
  });
});

E2E Tests

  1. Test critical user journeys only -- sign up, purchase, core workflow
  2. Use realistic data -- not "test123" or "foo bar"
  3. Use data-testid attributes -- data-testid="submit-button", not CSS selectors
  4. Handle async operations explicitly -- wait for elements, not fixed timeouts
  5. Run in CI against a staging environment
  6. Keep under 10 minutes total

Coverage Targets

MetricTargetNotes
Line coverage80%+Higher for critical modules
Branch coverage75%+Ensures conditional paths are tested
Function coverage85%+All public functions tested
Critical paths100%Payment, auth, data integrity

Rules

  1. Coverage is a floor, not a ceiling -- don't write bad tests to hit a number
  2. Track coverage trends -- it should go up or stay flat, never down
  3. Enforce in CI -- fail the build if coverage drops below the threshold
  4. Exclude generated code -- don't count auto-generated files, configs, or type definitions

Test File Organization

src/
  services/
    order.service.ts
    order.service.test.ts        # Unit tests colocated
  api/
    routes/
      users.route.ts
tests/
  integration/
    api/
      users.test.ts              # Integration tests separate
  e2e/
    flows/
      checkout.test.ts           # E2E tests separate
  fixtures/
    users.json                   # Shared test data
  helpers/
    test-db.ts                   # Shared test utilities

Anti-patterns

  • Testing implementation details -- test behavior, not how it's implemented
  • Snapshot overuse -- snapshots are brittle; use them for serializable output, not UI
  • Flaky tests -- fix or delete them; a flaky test is worse than no test
  • Test setup duplication -- extract to helper functions or fixtures
  • Ignoring test failures -- a skipped test is a known bug you're choosing to keep
  • 100% coverage obsession -- diminishing returns past 85%; focus on meaningful tests

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.