wct-test-honesty
Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Audit whether Python test assertions trace to production behavior. Use for weak or generated tests, mock-only assertions, suspicious coverage, test-suite review, or G-INTROVERT ratchet findings.
In this repository31 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- .cursor/rules/wct.mdcCursor rule
- wct-acceptanceSkill
- wct-adoptSkill
- wct-architectureSkill
- wct-crapSkill
- wct-dependenciesSkill
- wct-doctorSkill
- wct-drySkill
- wct-gateSkill
- wct-hardeningSkill
- wct-mutateSkill
- wct-ratchetSkill
- wct-reviewSkill
- wct-securitySkill
- wct-test-honestySkill
- wct-acceptanceSkill
- wct-adoptSkill
- wct-architectureSkill
- wct-crapSkill
- wct-dependenciesSkill
- wct-doctorSkill
- wct-drySkill
- wct-gateSkill
- wct-hardeningSkill
- wct-mutateSkill
- wct-ratchetSkill
- wct-reviewSkill
- wct-securitySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 10
Treat questionable as “unknown”, not failure.
- Distinctive: line 11
Do not apply this heuristic to generated acceptance tests.
- Distinctive: line 12
Keep it a ratchet, never a hard gate: static provenance is heuristic.
≈ “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
Audit test honesty
- Run
uv run wct introvert --json [test paths...]. - Fix
introvertedfirst: assert an observable result derived from the SUT. - Treat
questionableas “unknown”, not failure; inspect it manually. - Do not apply this heuristic to generated acceptance tests.
- Keep it a ratchet, never a hard gate: static provenance is heuristic.
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.