agentleFS
iadr-deviadr-dev/colab/skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md

test-driven-development

Skill2 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

RED-GREEN-REFACTOR discipline. Write failing test first, minimum code to pass, then refactor. Enforces verifier check before claiming any task done. Triggers on keyword "tdd" or when BUILD workflow is active.

190 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

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.
  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-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

  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-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

  • obraSkill

    diagnosing-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

  • LLl0k0laDSkill

    using-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

  • LLl0k0laDSkill

    git-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

  • MrCipherSmithSkill

    constraint-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

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

12 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 178 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 12

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Before any implementation code:

    line 18
  2. Distinctive:

    Write a test describing observable behavior through the public interface

    line 19
  3. Distinctive:

    Run the test — confirm it FAILS

    line 20
  4. Distinctive:

    Do not write implementation until the test fails correctly.

    line 27
  5. Distinctive:

    Avoid implementation-detail tests: private methods, internal call counts, and mocked internal collaborators.

    line 28
  6. Distinctive:

    Write the MINIMUM code needed to make the test pass.

    line 33
  7. Distinctive:

    No optimization. No refactoring.

    line 34
  8. Distinctive:

    Run the test. Read the output.

    line 37
  9. Distinctive:

    If it doesn't pass: fix implementation, not the test (unless test was wrong).

    line 38
  10. Distinctive:

    After each change: run the tests.

    line 43
  11. Distinctive:

    Never move to the next task while tests are red.

    line 46
  12. Distinctive:

    After RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for each task: → Hand to verifier agent with exact test command → Verifier runs both tests AND static quality …

    line 50

“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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Test-Driven Development

The loop: RED → GREEN → REFACTOR. Never skip a phase. Work in vertical slices: one behavior test, the minimum implementation, then the next behavior. Do not write all tests first and all implementation later.

RED — Write a failing test first

Before any implementation code:

  1. Write a test describing observable behavior through the public interface
  2. Run the test — confirm it FAILS
  3. Confirm it fails for the RIGHT reason:
    • ✓ "function doesn't exist yet"
    • ✓ "function returns wrong value"
    • ✗ "syntax error in test" → fix the test first
    • ✗ "missing import in test" → fix the import first

Do not write implementation until the test fails correctly. Avoid implementation-detail tests: private methods, internal call counts, and mocked internal collaborators. Mock only system boundaries.

GREEN — Minimum code to pass

Write the MINIMUM code needed to make the test pass. No optimization. No refactoring. No extra features. The ugliest correct code beats the prettiest incorrect code.

Run the test. Read the output. If it doesn't pass: fix implementation, not the test (unless test was wrong).

REFACTOR — Clean up while staying green

Improve the code. Rename. Extract. Simplify. After each change: run the tests. If they fail: revert the change. Refactor ends when: code is clean AND tests still pass.

Never move to the next task while tests are red.

Verifier Handoff

After RED-GREEN-REFACTOR for each task: → Hand to verifier agent with exact test command → Verifier runs both tests AND static quality checks, reports pass/fail counts → Only proceed if: 0 failing tests, 0 skipped, 0 failing quality checks, success criterion met

# Tests
bash skills/test-driven-development/scripts/verify-tests-pass.sh

# Typecheck + lint (auto-detects TS, JS, Python, Go, Rust, Dart, Swift; skips missing tools)
bash skills/test-driven-development/scripts/verify-code-quality.sh

Common Mistakes

Writing implementation first: Resist. The test comes first, always. Tests that always pass: A test that never fails is not a test. Confirm RED first. "I'll add tests later": Post-implementation tests test the implementation, not the requirement. Horizontal slicing: Writing many tests before any implementation creates brittle imagined tests. Skipping refactor: Technical debt is immediate. Refactor now while context is fresh.

See references/red-green-refactor.md for detailed examples. See references/test-patterns.md for patterns by language. See references/behavior-first-testing.md for vertical slices, mocking, and interface design.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.