ci-cd-and-test-data
Skill1 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub
Wire tests into CI/CD (GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Jenkins, Azure DevOps) with quality gates, sharding, artifacts, and a reliable test-data strategy.
In this repository16 other files it gives its agents.
- accessibility-auditSkill
- api-test-generatorSkill
- automation-code-reviewSkill
- bug-report-writerSkill
- device-cloud-setupSkill
- flaky-test-triageSkill
- framework-scaffolderSkill
- greenbuild-getting-startedSkill
- llm-app-testingSkill
- mobile-automationSkill
- performance-test-starterSkill
- regression-health-digestSkill
- release-readiness-checklistSkill
- test-plan-from-requirementsSkill
- tools-and-librariesSkill
- visual-testingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are 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.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 28
Create through the API in setup with unique values (uuid/timestamp suffix), and clean up in teardown.
- Distinctive: line 29
Use factories/builders (Faker, factory_boy) instead of shared fixtures that mutate.
≈ “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
CI/CD and test data
- Pipeline stages: lint/unit → API tests → UI smoke on each PR → full regression nightly or pre-release → perf/a11y on a schedule.
- GitHub Actions (Playwright example):
jobs:
e2e:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
strategy: { matrix: { shard: [1, 2, 3, 4] } }
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-node@v4
with: { node-version: 22 }
- run: npm ci && npx playwright install --with-deps
- run: npx playwright test --shard=${{ matrix.shard }}/4
env: { BASE_URL: ${{ vars.STAGING_URL }} }
- uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
if: ${{ !cancelled() }}
with: { name: report-${{ matrix.shard }}, path: playwright-report/ }GitLab: parallel: + artifacts: when: always. Jenkins: junit 'results/*.xml' in post { always }.
3. Quality gates: fail on any test failure, report retries separately (a pass after a retry means flaky, not green), and use coverage or contract checks where the team agreed.
4. Secrets: CI secret store only. Mask them in logs, and never echo tokens.
5. Test data strategy:
- Create through the API in setup with unique values (uuid/timestamp suffix), and clean up in teardown.
- Use factories/builders (Faker, factory_boy) instead of shared fixtures that mutate.
- Seed known reference data per environment, and use read-only accounts for read-only tests.
- Isolate per worker for parallel runs. Mask or synthesize PII, and never copy production personal data.
- Speed: cache dependencies, shard, run only impacted tests on PRs where tooling supports it, and fail fast on smoke.
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.

