agent-integration-testing
Skill28 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the user requests integration testing, feature validation, or test plan execution
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- av/harborword for word, first seen Oct 8, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- av/harbor★ 3.3k100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
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 repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- annealSkill
- article-factorySkill
- autoresearchSkill
- boost-modulesSkill
- bugbashSkill
- bughuntSkill
- catalog-deslopSkill
- disciplineSkill
- factual-communicationSkill
- ideateSkill
- improve-skillSkill
- make-videoSkill
- mosaic-writingSkill
- preact-buildless-frontendSkill
- pull-llamacpp-modelSkill
- run-llmsSkill
- sandcastleSkill
- superclaudeSkill
- timeboxed-iteratingSkill
- timeframe-researchSkill
- tinygradSkill
- turso-dbSkill
- use-coding-agentsSkill
- workgraphSkill
- workmachineSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 4 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.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 15
If the user specifies a feature area, use glob and grep to narrow the investigation.
- Very specific: line 18
Create a test spec file at ./tests/<name>.md.
- Very specific: line 19
Use <name> = "integration" unless the user specifies a particular feature area.
- Distinctive: line 26
CRITICAL: Every expectation must be strictly verifiable by an agent using available tools (e.g., shell commands, HTTP requests, reading …
- Very specific: line 34
If the user explicitly specifies that failures should be fixed, spawn another subagent (e.g., the SWE or BUILDER agent) to investigate and …
≈ “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
Agent Integration Testing
Overview
This skill guides the creation and autonomous execution of verifiable integration test specifications. It ensures that tests are actionable by agents, properly documented, and systematically executed by subagents to validate features or fix failures.
Core Process
- Investigate Codebase Area
- By default, investigate the entire codebase to understand the context.
- If the user specifies a feature area, use
globandgrepto narrow the investigation.
- Write Test Specification
- Create a test spec file at
./tests/<name>.md. - Use
<name> = "integration"unless the user specifies a particular feature area. - The document MUST include a Prerequisites section at the top detailing any setup needed before tests become runnable (e.g., environment variables, database seeding, background services).
- Create a test spec file at
- Define Verifiable Tests
- Each test must be written in plain English.
- Include clear steps to reproduce.
- Include a set of expectations.
- CRITICAL: Every expectation must be strictly verifiable by an agent using available tools (e.g., shell commands, HTTP requests, reading file outputs). If a test cannot be verified by an agent, it is invalid and must be rewritten or removed.
- Execute Tests via Subagents
- Spawn subagents (using the
Tasktool or@mentionsubagent system) to run each individual test. - The subagent must follow the prerequisites, execute the steps, and validate the outcomes against the expectations.
- Collect the results (Pass/Fail and logs) from the subagents.
- Spawn subagents (using the
- Fix Failures (Optional)
- If the user explicitly specifies that failures should be fixed, spawn another subagent (e.g., the
SWEorBUILDERagent) to investigate and fix any noted failures.
- If the user explicitly specifies that failures should be fixed, spawn another subagent (e.g., the
Quick Reference
| Action | Pattern / Command |
| Test File Location | ./tests/<name>.md (default: integration.md) |
| Prerequisites | Must be documented at the top of the test file |
| Test Format | Plain English, Repro Steps, Verifiable Expectations |
| Execution | Spawn one subagent per test or test suite |
| Fixing | Spawn SWE/BUILDER subagent if requested by user |
Red Flags - STOP and Start Over
- Unverifiable Tests: "Verify the UI looks nice" or "Check if the animation is smooth." (Agents cannot verify visual aesthetics without specific tools). Fix: Rewrite to check DOM elements, network responses, or file states.
- Missing Prerequisites: Subagents failing because the server wasn't started. Fix: Ensure the prerequisite section explicitly defines the commands to start dependencies.
- Executing Tests Manually: Running tests in the main conversation thread instead of spawning subagents. Fix: Dispatch parallel subagents for isolated execution.
Example Test Specification (./tests/auth-integration.md)
# Auth Integration Tests
## Prerequisites
- Start the test database: `docker compose up -d db`
- Run migrations: `npm run migrate`
- Start the server in background: `npm run start:test &`
## Test 1: User Registration
**Steps:**
1. Send a POST request to `/api/register` with payload `{"email": "test@example.com", "password": "pass"}`.
**Expectations:**
1. The HTTP response status must be `201 Created`.
2. A subsequent query to the database using `sqlite3 test.db "SELECT email FROM users WHERE email='test@example.com';"` must return the email.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.

