iphone-duo-testing
Skill4 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Plan and execute iPhone Duo app QA across open, closed, folded, and rotated poses, Split View, keyboard and sheet states, accessibility, camera and accessory capability loss, and older iPhones, with reproducible evidence. Use when testing an app in the iPhone Duo simulator or Device Hub, writing XCUITest coverage for display transitions, deciding what needs a physical device, or preparing Duo release evidence such as screenshot sizes.
In this repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- iphone-duo-cameraSkill
- iphone-duo-designSkill
- iphone-duo-developmentSkill
- iphone-duo-layoutSkill
- iphone-duo-readinessSkill
- iphone-duo-scenesSkill
- iphone-duo-toolbarsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
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
- Distinctive: line 9
Read test matrix. Build a matrix around the requested flows and the actual available environment.
- Very specific: line 13
Use xcodebuild -version, xcodebuild -showsdks, xcrun simctl list runtimes, and xcrun simctl list devices available when available.
- Distinctive: line 15
If Duo tooling is absent, continue meaningful resize, model, and existing-platform tests.
- Distinctive: line 21
Test intermediate constraints, not just launch at two endpoint sizes.
≈ “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
iPhone Duo testing
Read test matrix. Build a matrix around the requested flows and the actual available environment. Record the candidate revision and build, Xcode build, SDK, runtime or device, and relevant settings.
Discover before executing
Use xcodebuild -version, xcodebuild -showsdks, xcrun simctl list runtimes, and xcrun simctl list devices available when available. Discover the project's scheme and destinations. Never invent a device identifier or a fold-control command-line flag. Change poses with Device Hub's controls for the iPhone Duo simulator, or with documented automation on a physical device.
If Duo tooling is absent, continue meaningful resize, model, and existing-platform tests. Label those results as proxies. Leave actual Duo transitions untested rather than converting proxy coverage into device validation.
Exercise transitions
Select a real task with state: an unsaved draft, selected item, queued upload, or playing video. Establish the initial state, apply the transition, and then complete or cancel the task. Verify both visible UI and persistent output.
Test intermediate constraints, not just launch at two endpoint sizes. Check that asynchronous work runs the intended number of times, navigation remains coherent, and focus does not disappear into a hidden view. Include error recovery for features that depend on a camera or accessory.
Use automated assertions for stable observable outcomes. In UI tests, let layout settle after typing, presenting, or changing pose before resolving the next element, and never add a retry tap: it hides real bugs. Use screenshots for layout evidence and interaction checks for reachability and accessibility. An accessibility audit supplements manual assistive-technology testing; it does not replace it.
Report
For each scenario, record precondition / action / expected / observed / environment / evidence / status. Use pass, fail, blocked, or not run; give a reason for missing evidence. Separate simulator limitations from app failures. Link relevant screenshots, recordings, test results, or logs using synthetic or redacted data.
Finish with failures ranked by user impact, verified scope, and the remaining device-specific checks. A green build or a type-check certifies neither correct folding behavior nor submission readiness.
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.

