selective-build-test
Skill4 starsChanged 10 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use this skill whenever preparing local or CI execution to build and test only the impacted components identified by change impact analysis, while preserving quality gates and correctness.
In this repository67 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agents-onboardingSkill
- agent-workitem-automationSkill
- architecture-testingSkill
- aspire-integration-testingSkill
- automated-standards-enforcementSkill
- best-practice-introductionSkill
- branching-strategy-and-conventionsSkill
- broken-windowSkill
- change-risk-rollbackSkill
- ci-cd-conformanceSkill
- component-boundary-ownershipSkill
- contract-consistency-validationSkill
- csharp-best-practicesSkill
- deployment-provenanceSkill
- documentation-as-codeSkill
- documentation-scaffoldSkill
- dotnet-bespoke-code-minimisationSkill
- dotnet-best-practicesSkill
- dotnet-domain-primitivesSkill
- dotnet-efcore-practicesSkill
- dotnet-healthchecksSkill
- dotnet-logging-serilogSkill
- dotnet-mapping-standardSkill
- dotnet-open-source-first-governanceSkill
- dotnet-source-generation-firstSkill
- dotnet-specification-patternSkill
- dotnet-testing-assertionsSkill
- environment-traceabilitySkill
- finishing-a-development-branch-iddSkill
- greenfield-baselineSkill
- impacted-scope-enforcementSkill
- incremental-change-impactSkill
- incremental-deploymentSkill
- innersource-governance-bootstrapSkill
- issue-driven-deliverySkill
- library-extraction-stabilisationSkill
- local-dev-experienceSkill
- markdown-authorSkill
- modern-csharp-coding-standardsSkill
- monorepo-orchestration-setupSkill
- observability-logging-baselineSkill
- pair-programmingSkill
- persona-switchingSkill
- process-skill-routerSkill
- quality-gate-enforcementSkill
- release-tagging-planSkill
- repo-best-practices-bootstrapSkill
- repository-foundation-bootstrapSkill
- requirements-gatheringSkill
- runtime-tooling-validationSkill
- safe-brownfield-refactorSkill
- scoped-colocationSkill
- security-processesSkill
- semantic-version-impactSkill
- session-awareSkill
- skills-first-workflowSkill
- static-analysis-securitySkill
- structured-review-workflowSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
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 19
Before local build/test runs in a monorepo.
- Distinctive: line 20
When configuring or reviewing CI behaviour for incremental execution.
- Distinctive: line 21
When optimising feedback loops without weakening standards.
- Distinctive: line 53
Documentation: Document the selective execution plan, including which tiers were run and why.
- Distinctive: line 92
Must consume the output of incremental-change-impact
- Distinctive: line 94
If uncertainty exists, broaden scope rather than suppress checks (with justification)
≈ “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
Selective Build & Test Planning
Intent
Plan and execute only the necessary builds and tests for impacted components, based on an explicit impact assessment, while maintaining full quality and correctness standards. This includes using monorepo-aware tooling to ensure only affected code is re-verified, keeping feedback loops fast.
When to Use
- Before local build/test runs in a monorepo.
- When configuring or reviewing CI behaviour for incremental execution.
- When optimising feedback loops without weakening standards.
- Always in multi-component projects to avoid redundant work.
Precondition Failure Signal
- Full repo builds/tests run for small changes.
- Monorepo tooling (e.g., Nx, Turborepo) is present but not used or configured incorrectly.
- Incremental runs miss required tests for impacted components.
- Developers bypass checks because “it takes too long.”
- CI outputs cannot explain why a component did/did not run.
Postcondition Success Signal
- Build/test matrix includes all and only impacted components.
- Tooling correctly identifies "affected" projects based on git graph.
- Required transitive tests are included where dependencies demand it.
- Quality gates remain unchanged; only the scope is reduced.
- Execution is reproducible and reviewable from the same inputs.
Process
- Source Review: Inspect the impact set produced by
incremental-change-impactand determine the appropriate testing tier (UnitTest, SystemTest, ComponentE2E, E2E, ArchitectureTest) based on the current execution stage (Dev, Pre-commit, Pre-push, CI/CD). - Discovery & Implementation:
- Identify the correct monorepo tool (e.g., Nx, Turborepo) for the project stack.
- Configure the tool (e.g.,
nx affected,turbo run --filter=[head]) to only target the identified components and tiers.
- Verification: Execute the build/test and verify that only the intended components and tiers were processed and that they passed.
- Documentation: Document the selective execution plan, including which tiers were run and why.
- Review: Platform/DevOps Engineer and Tech Lead review the selective execution results for correctness, coverage, and alignment with the test execution matrix.
Example Test / Validation
- Change a single component and verify only that component’s build/tests run
- Introduce a dependency change and verify dependent components are included
- Confirm quality gates are identical to full runs for impacted components
Common Red Flags / Guardrail Violations
- Skipping pre-commit hooks or checks “to save time”
- Reducing scope by suppressing tests rather than proving non-impact
- Disabling warnings-as-errors or lint rules to speed up builds
- Incremental logic that is not reproducible or explainable
Recommended Review Personas
- Platform/DevOps Engineer – validates correctness of incremental execution
- Tech Lead – validates standards are not weakened and scope is justified
- Domain Expert – validates dependency assumptions
Skill Priority
P3 – Delivery & Flow
(Must never override P0–P2 constraints.)
Conflict Resolution Rules
- Must consume the output of incremental-change-impact
- Cannot weaken quality gates; only reduces scope
- If uncertainty exists, broaden scope rather than suppress checks (with justification)
Conceptual Dependencies
- incremental-change-impact
- quality-gate-enforcement
Classification
Operational
Notes
Optimise feedback loops, not standards. Faster is acceptable only when correct. Refer to the repository's "Test Execution Matrix" for stage-specific tier requirements.
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.

