test-driven-development
Skill1 starsChanged 21 days agoMITView on GitHub
Test-driven implementation for every production behaviour change. Use inside every unit, bug fix, and review fix. Strict test-first where the test is the contract; test-required and order-flexible elsewhere. Run focused tests as you go and the full specs and lint once at the end. A user-facing unit is not done until the journey is proven.
190 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- DemonDamon/AgenticXtheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- chrysogonus/power-agentstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ishandutta2007/Awesome-Agent-Skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- roundpilot/superpowers-antigravitytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- REPOZY/superpowers-optimizedtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lingyired/status-triotheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use chinese-code-review, chinese-commit-conventions and 10 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.
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-code-review
中文代码审查规范——在保持专业严谨的同时,用符合国内团队文化的方式给出有效反馈
Also in 8 projects that use this
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-commit-conventions
中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化
Also in 8 projects that use this
obraSkilldiagnosing-superpowers
Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor results, a skill that didn't fire, "it took too long", "why is it so expensive", "what is it doing" — or wants to build a bug report for the superpowers maintainers, for the current session or a past one identified by id or path, on any harness.
Also in 19 projects that use this
LLl0k0laDSkillusing-agent-skills
Use when starting a session or when you need to discover which skill applies to the current task. This is the meta-skill that governs how all other skills are discovered and invoked.
Also in 39 projects that use this
LLl0k0laDSkillgit-workflow-and-versioning
Use when making any code change. Use when committing, branching, resolving conflicts, or when you need to organize work across multiple parallel streams.
Also in 47 projects that use this
MrCipherSmithSkillconstraint-driven-development
Use when a project needs a persistent, measurable quality bar — starting a project without documented standards, 'set up constraints', or when coverage/perf/a11y thresholds get re-debated per-PR. Produces CONSTRAINTS.md with enforceable numbers, ratchets, and a guard against silent weakening. NOT for throwaway prototypes or a one-off CI setup.
Also in 15 projects that use this
- +3 more from Leodorareluctant259
- +3 more from LLl0k0laD
Other versions190 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 190
- obra/superpowers★ 314ksame name
- NousResearch/hermes-agent★ 262ksame name
- addyosmani/agent-skills★ 114ksame name
- cloudflare/computer★ 9.9ksame name
- jnMetaCode/superpowers-zh★ 8.4ksame name
- openai/plugins★ 7.8ksame name
- farm-fe/farm★ 5.6ksame name
- microsoft/FluidFramework★ 4.9ksame name
- mikeyobrien/ralph-orchestrator★ 3.2ksame name
- crbnos/carbon★ 2.8ksame name
180 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- brainstormingSkill
- development-workflowSkill
- exploringSkill
- finishing-developmentSkill
- requesting-reviewSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- writing-plansSkill
- writing-skillsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 178 edited versions we read keep these.
9
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 8
Run this as the implementer.
- Distinctive: line 10
No production behaviour ships untested.
- Distinctive: line 25
Red: - write the smallest test for the behaviour.
- Distinctive: line 27
Green: - write the least code that passes.
- Distinctive: line 28
Watch it pass: - run only the focused test.
- Distinctive: line 36
Run focused tests during the cycle - only what you need to see red and green.
- Distinctive: line 37
When the unit's work is done, run the unit's full spec and lint commands
- Distinctive: line 46
Use real collaborators where practical.
- Distinctive: line 54
Write an end-to-end test that starts where a user lands and navigates through the interface.
- Very specific: line 62
When you change untested behaviour that must be kept, write a characterisation test first.
- Very specific: line 68
Only the user can approve skipping the red step, for one specific behaviour where a failing test cannot be observed.
- Distinctive: line 75
Every behaviour is tested (red observed where strict), the full specs and lint passed in one final run recorded in the report, and - for a …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 178 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.
Files
Test-Driven Development
Run this as the implementer.
No production behaviour ships untested. Two tiers - project instructions decide which layers fall where; if they are silent, use these:
- Strict test-first - where the test is the contract other code relies on: a public API or endpoint, a domain operation with declared inputs, outputs, and errors, a published library surface. Write the failing test before the code exists.
- Test-required, order-flexible - everything else: helpers, view components, adapters, serialisers, end-to-end tests. The behaviour must end up tested; the order is yours.
The cycle
One behaviour at a time:
- Red - write the smallest test for the behaviour.
- Watch it fail for the missing behaviour, not for a typo or load error.
- Green - write the least code that passes. Nothing speculative.
- Watch it pass - run only the focused test.
- Refactor while green.
Code written before its test, on a strict layer, is test-after. Delete it and rebuild it from a failing test.
Checks: focused as you go, full once at the end
Run focused tests during the cycle - only what you need to see red and green. When the unit's work is done, run the unit's full spec and lint commands once and record the output in your report. If that run fails, fix and run it once more. Reviewers do not run checks; your final run is the evidence.
What good tests do
- Assert observable behaviour - return values, errors, persisted rows, emitted events, enqueued work - not internals.
- Cover every happy path and every failure path, including the error contract.
- Use real collaborators where practical. Mock only real boundaries.
- Stub network calls, including timeout, error status, and malformed body.
- Stay deterministic and independent of order.
User-facing units: prove the journey
- Wire the entry point - the nav item, link, or control that gets a user to the feature.
- Write an end-to-end test that starts where a user lands and navigates through the interface. Do not jump to the deep URL.
- Assert the visible outcome.
A user-facing unit is not done until this test passes.
Existing untested code
When you change untested behaviour that must be kept, write a characterisation
test first. For a defect, the first test reproduces the root cause found by
systematic-debugging.
Exceptions
Only the user can approve skipping the red step, for one specific behaviour
where a failing test cannot be observed. Ask with the behaviour, the reason, the
substitute check, and the risk. Record the approval and its scope in
PROGRESS.md. It does not extend to other behaviour.
Done when
Every behaviour is tested (red observed where strict), the full specs and lint passed in one final run recorded in the report, and - for a user-facing unit - the journey test passed. A unit with no production behaviour is exempt only when the diff proves it.
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.

