fixture-driven-transcript-tests
Skill0 starsChanged 14 days agoMITView on GitHub
Keep a request/response transcript on disk and assert the server still matches it. Use when a protocol server has behaviours that must not drift across refactors
In this repository49 other files it gives its agents.
- argument-construction-from-artifactsSkill
- audit-log-of-tool-callsSkill
- bounded-output-designSkill
- capability-negotiation-checkSkill
- changelog-and-versioningSkill
- concurrency-and-ordering-checkSkill
- context-window-managementSkill
- credential-isolationSkill
- data-retention-policySkill
- description-as-contractSkill
- destructive-action-confirmationSkill
- destructive-tool-gatingSkill
- deterministic-command-choicesSkill
- done-when-criteriaSkill
- error-shape-for-agentsSkill
- human-in-the-loop-escalationSkill
- idempotency-annotationSkill
- input-schema-strictnessSkill
- least-privilege-tool-grantsSkill
- lifecycle-test-initialize-then-toolsSkill
- local-vs-remote-boundarySkill
- one-procedure-per-skillSkill
- pagination-and-limit-disciplineSkill
- parallel-tool-call-safetySkill
- protocol-conformance-testSkill
- protocol-version-handshakeSkill
- publishing-a-pack-locallySkill
- rate-limit-respectSkill
- reference-canonicalisationSkill
- replay-transcript-for-regressionSkill
- restart-and-reload-semanticsSkill
- scope-guard-before-executionSkill
- search-then-fetch-patternSkill
- secrets-via-environmentSkill
- server-discovery-and-trustSkill
- signal-and-pitfall-sectionsSkill
- skill-frontmatter-contractSkill
- stdio-client-configSkill
- stdout-purity-checkSkill
- third-party-server-sandboxingSkill
- tool-call-budgetingSkill
- tool-call-error-pathsSkill
- tool-error-without-retry-stormSkill
- tools-list-schema-validationSkill
- tool-surface-minimisationSkill
- tool-verb-namingSkill
- transport-choiceSkill
- verify-tool-output-before-reportingSkill
- when-to-use-and-avoidSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
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
- Distinctive: line 25
Update the fixture in the same commit as an intended behaviour change
≈ “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
Fixture Driven Transcript Tests
Keep a request/response transcript on disk and assert the server still matches it
Use when: a protocol server has behaviours that must not drift across refactors
Avoid when: the server output is intentionally non-deterministic, such as timestamped logs
Procedure
- Record one transcript per behaviour: handshake, search, fetch, error
- Store requests and expected responses as separate JSON lines
- Drive the server with the request lines in a subprocess
- Compare the meaningful fields, ignoring volatile ones such as paths
- Fail the test on any unexpected field or missing reply
- Update the fixture in the same commit as an intended behaviour change
Signals
- each transcript replays with identical semantic output
- volatile fields are named in an ignore list
- a deliberate behaviour change requires a fixture update in the same commit
- the fixture set covers happy and error paths
Patterns
1. Pair files
handshake.requests.jsonl and handshake.expected.jsonl2. Ignore list
ignore: serverInfo.version when bumped deliberately3. Diff on failure
print the first differing field, not the whole payloadPitfalls
- Asserting the whole response including volatile fields, so tests fail for no reason
- Regenerating fixtures blindly to make CI green
- Testing through a client library that reformats the response
Done when
- each behaviour has a committed transcript that replays identically
- volatile fields are excluded by an explicit list
References
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.

