behavior-specification
Skill2 starsChanged 36 days agoMITView on GitHub
Behavior specification: decide and describe the behavior to test through context, action, observable outcome, concrete examples, and behavior names. Use when authoring or revising scenarios or test descriptions.
In this repository22 other files it gives its agents.
- atddSkill
- automated-checksSkill
- bddSkill
- choose-orchestrationSkill
- codebase-designSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- compile-instructionSkill
- computer-use-wizardSkill
- gherkinSkill
- goal-loopSkill
- goal-superviseSkill
- high-value-testingSkill
- hvtddSkill
- idiot-bossSkill
- retroSkill
- setup-engineering-skillsSkill
- tddSkill
- test-implementationSkill
- testingSkill
- ubuntu-desktop-computer-useSkill
- ubuntu-machine-configurationSkill
- writing-for-agentsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 8
Use this reference to specify what behavior should be tested.
- Very specific: line 10
When exploring the codebase, read GLOSSARY.md (if it exists) so test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 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.
Files
Behavior specification
Use this reference to specify what behavior should be tested. A .feature scenario or a test description can express that specification; executable setup, invocation, and assertions are a separate concern.
When exploring the codebase, read GLOSSARY.md (if it exists) so test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language.
- Frame the work as behavior rather than as tests: behavior names what the system should do; tests check whether it does.
- Evolve the design by probing for the next important behavior. Use concrete examples to make the expected behavior precise.
- Describe the relevant context, action, and observable outcome in the domain's language. Specify what should happen, leaving internal realization open.
- Describe one coherent behavior through a public interface.
- Name tests with sentences about their behavior. Prefer a simple sentence format to keep each test focused; an expressive name communicates the broken expectation when it fails.
- Make acceptance criteria executable when specifying acceptance behavior, so the examples can verify whether the agreed behavior exists.
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
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.