test-engineering
Skill1 starsChanged 17 days agoMITView on GitHub
Design, implement, and improve automated tests for application behavior, regressions, integrations, and edge cases. Use when adding features, fixing defects, reviewing test coverage, or diagnosing failing tests.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. 0 are common, 13 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
13
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
- Distinctive: line 15
Read the feature requirements, acceptance criteria, and existing tests.
- Distinctive: line 35
Use descriptive names that express the behavior being verified.
- Distinctive: line 36
Keep arrange, act, and assert steps clear.
- Distinctive: line 37
Prefer deterministic inputs and controlled dependencies.
- Distinctive: line 38
Use mocks only when they clarify a boundary or isolate an external dependency.
- Distinctive: line 39
Test externally observable behavior instead of private implementation details where practical.
- Distinctive: line 42
Run the new tests first.
- Distinctive: line 43
Run the relevant existing test suite.
- Distinctive: line 51
Avoid dependence on execution order, wall-clock timing, or external services unless intentional.
- Distinctive: line 53
Avoid broad exception assertions that allow unrelated failures to pass.
- Distinctive: line 54
Do not assert implementation details that are irrelevant to the contract.
- Distinctive: line 55
Keep fixtures small, explicit, and reusable only when reuse improves clarity.
- Distinctive: line 59
Use coverage reports to discover untested paths, not as the sole measure of quality.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 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 Engineering
Objective
Build a trustworthy test suite that detects regressions and verifies observable behavior without becoming unnecessarily slow, brittle, or difficult to maintain.
Workflow
- Understand the behavior
- Read the feature requirements, acceptance criteria, and existing tests.
- Identify inputs, outputs, state changes, side effects, and failure modes.
- Clarify ambiguous requirements before encoding assumptions in tests.
- Choose the appropriate test level
- Unit tests: isolated functions, classes, and business rules.
- Integration tests: interactions between modules, databases, APIs, and services.
- End-to-end tests: critical user workflows across the running system.
- Contract tests: compatibility at service or API boundaries.
- Performance and resilience tests: latency, throughput, resource use, and failure recovery where relevant.
- Cover meaningful scenarios
- Normal and successful cases.
- Empty, missing, malformed, and boundary inputs.
- Invalid state transitions and business-rule violations.
- Permission failures and unauthenticated access.
- Dependency timeouts, errors, and unavailable services.
- Duplicate requests, retries, and concurrency where applicable.
- Write maintainable tests
- Use descriptive names that express the behavior being verified.
- Keep arrange, act, and assert steps clear.
- Prefer deterministic inputs and controlled dependencies.
- Use mocks only when they clarify a boundary or isolate an external dependency.
- Test externally observable behavior instead of private implementation details where practical.
- Verify the tests
- Run the new tests first.
- Run the relevant existing test suite.
- Confirm that a regression test fails when the defect is reintroduced, where practical.
- Inspect failures instead of automatically updating expected results.
- Report skipped tests and environmental limitations honestly.
Test quality rules
- A test should fail when the behavior it protects becomes incorrect.
- Avoid dependence on execution order, wall-clock timing, or external services unless intentional.
- Isolate shared state and clean up resources.
- Avoid broad exception assertions that allow unrelated failures to pass.
- Do not assert implementation details that are irrelevant to the contract.
- Keep fixtures small, explicit, and reusable only when reuse improves clarity.
Coverage
Use coverage reports to discover untested paths, not as the sole measure of quality. Prioritize high-risk business logic, security boundaries, critical workflows, and known regression areas.
Final report
Summarize the behaviors covered, test levels used, commands executed, results, and important coverage gaps. Never claim that the entire suite passed if only a subset was executed.
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 6
- juninmd/skills★ 2same name
- Lu1sDV/skillsmd★ 2same name
- nafeeur/MaskShift★ 2same name
- yuexueyu/anna-agent-skills★ 2same name
- formal-you/agent-skills-suite★ 0same name
- weiweimhy/agent-skills★ 0same name
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 repository28 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-architecture-designSkill
- agent-evaluationSkill
- agent-harness-engineeringSkill
- agentic-workflow-testingSkill
- agent-memory-designSkill
- browser-computer-useSkill
- durable-agent-workflowsSkill
- human-in-the-loopSkill
- mcp-developmentSkill
- mcp-server-developmentSkill
- multi-agent-orchestrationSkill
- tool-calling-designSkill
- advanced-retrieval-rerankingSkill
- context-engineeringSkill
- embedding-model-engineeringSkill
- llm-evaluationSkill
- llm-observabilitySkill
- model-serving-inferenceSkill
- multimodal-ai-pipelinesSkill
- prompt-engineeringSkill
- rag-engineeringSkill
- rag-pipeline-engineeringSkill
- structured-outputsSkill
- agentic-securitySkill
- security-reviewSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- debuggingSkill
- example-skillSkill
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.

