agentleFS
itsaspacestationitsaspacestation/natural-intelligence/skills/tdd/SKILL.md

tdd

Skill1 starsChanged 23 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Use when writing tests, adding test coverage, implementing a feature or fix test-first, creating a failing test before code, or discussing red-green-refactor, acceptance tests, unit tests, or test strategy.

194 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use capture-learning-tools, design-frontend-dev 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.
  • The-Vibe-CompanySkill

    capture-learning-tools

    Turn technical conversations, bugs, CI failures, review comments,

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • The-Vibe-CompanySkill

    design-frontend-dev

    Clean Impeccable frontend design skill. Use when the user wants to

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • tristanphvnSkill

    ketchup-video

    Catch the user up like /keel:ketchup, with a short silent video of slides for what happened and the waiting calls as text under it. Use for /keel:ketchup-video.

    Also in 14 projects that use this

  • jaydubya818Skill

    figure-it-out

    Use when novel or multi-phase work needs an auditable workflow and no narrower playbook fits.

    Also in 54 projects that use this

  • jaydubya818Skill

    principle-laziness-protocol

    Apply when a refactor is adding wrappers or abstractions instead of simplifying.

    Also in 45 projects that use this

  • +2 more from The-Vibe-Company
  • +5 more from jaydubya818

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 186 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Any code change: - every fix, feature, or refactor must have a corresponding test

    line 8
  2. Distinctive:

    Test Driven Development with acceptance tests and unit tests.

    line 16
  3. Very specific:

    Create a failing acceptance test if it does not exist.

    line 24
  4. Distinctive:

    Run tests and get feedback

    line 27
  5. Distinctive:

    Skipping is stated, never silent: When red-first genuinely cannot apply (generated code, pure config), the final report says so and why, in …

    line 52
  6. Distinctive:

    Before committing, always run all tests in the solution or workspace.

    line 58
  7. Distinctive:

    Tests pass with assertions: - every test asserts expected behaviour, not just "no exception"

    line 61
  8. Very specific:

    Code coverage verified: - check the report for new or modified code (see software-engineer testing strategy)

    line 62

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 186 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

When to use

  • Any code change - every fix, feature, or refactor must have a corresponding test
  • User asks to write tests, add test coverage, or create a failing test first
  • User asks to implement a feature using TDD or test-first development
  • User mentions "red-green-refactor", "acceptance test", or "unit test"
  • User asks to verify that tests pass before committing

Overview

Test Driven Development with acceptance tests and unit tests. The test comes first and must fail before the implementation exists. That failure is the proof the test is worth anything.

Rules

  1. Preserve file encoding
  2. Analyse the test setup: which framework is actually used, how to build, how to run tests, how to read coverage (see the stack file in software-engineer)
  3. Create a failing acceptance test if it does not exist. It enters through the public surface and proves one behaviour end to end, one slice at a time (plan). Add unit tests for small cases or technical parts.
  4. Watch the test fail for the expected reason before writing any implementation
  5. Implement what the failing test demands and nothing more, so the next behaviour's test still goes red. Check first that the function does not already exist.
  6. Run tests and get feedback
  7. Refactor

Discipline

Implementation written before its test is deleted and restarted from the test. Not kept as reference, not adapted while the test is written. Deleted.

A test that passes on first run proves nothing. Make it fail first, or find out why it cannot fail and fix the test.

Record the red run — quote it, never paraphrase it. The final report carries the command and its decisive output lines verbatim, copy-pasted from the real runs:

$ pytest -q
2 failed: test_parse_rejects_empty, test_parse_rejects_unknown_unit
$ pytest -q
35 passed

"Tests were written first and failed" is a claim; the quoted lines are evidence. A reviewer who sees only the report cannot tell a paraphrased red run from one that never happened — the quote settles it at the cost of two lines.

Skipping is stated, never silent. When red-first genuinely cannot apply (generated code, pure config), the final report says so and why, in one line. A silent skip reads as a broken promise when discovered later.

Run tests and get feedback

Before committing, always run all tests in the solution or workspace. If the repo contains several solution files, confirm which one to use before.

  1. Tests pass with assertions - every test asserts expected behaviour, not just "no exception"
  2. Code coverage verified - check the report for new or modified code (see software-engineer testing strategy)

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.