flaky-test
Skill14 starsChanged 6 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the same test alternates between pass and fail without code edits, or when a failure cannot be reproduced. Rerun to confirm, find the source of nondeterminism, and never revert working code on an unconfirmed flake.
5 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- kitloomlk-stack/testing-debugging-kittheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- ArthurC02/SkillHubtheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- gravitational/teleporttheir own version, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- Jinbae10/skillstheir own version, first seen Jul 7, 2026
- Pradnyeshp/Claude-Skillstheir own version, first seen Jul 6, 2026
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- gravitational/teleport★ 21ksame name
- Pradnyeshp/Claude-Skills★ 2same name
- ArthurC02/SkillHub★ 1same name
- Jinbae10/skills★ 0same name
- kitloomlk-stack/testing-debugging-kit★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository9 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- aftermathSkill
- aftermathSkill
- build-failureSkill
- dependency-failureSkill
- destructive-actionSkill
- merge-conflictSkill
- retry-loopSkill
- test-regressionSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
6
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
- Distinctive: line 16
Stop. Do not revert or edit yet.
- Distinctive: line 19
Check the usual sources of nondeterminism, in this order:
- Distinctive: line 36
Never claim a flake without at least one rerun.
- Distinctive: line 37
Never weaken or skip an assertion to make a flake disappear.
- Distinctive: line 38
Never mix a flake fix with unrelated changes.
- Distinctive: line 39
Never use a flaky result as justification for a broad refactor.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 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.
Files
Flaky Test
A test that changes its mind is evidence about the test or its environment, not about your last edit.
Confirm before you act
- Stop. Do not revert or edit yet.
- Re-run the exact same test command. Capture each outcome.
- Pass/fail flips with no edit in between → flaky suspected. State the sequence explicitly, for example
pass → fail → pass. - Check the usual sources of nondeterminism, in this order:
- time and timezone (
Date.now,TZ, frozen clocks) - ordering and shared state (test isolation, parallel workers)
- randomness and seeds (
Math.random, faker, randomized fixtures) - network, ports, and external services
- filesystem state left by an earlier run
- time and timezone (
- Label the suspected source as theory until a repeat/seed/isolate experiment proves it.
- Fix the nondeterminism, not the assertion. Do not delete the test to get green.
Plugin behavior
- The outcome tracker flags
pass → fail → pass(or the reverse) with no editing between runs. - A flaky signal suppresses checkpoint auto-revert and does not freeze forward edits; rerunning is the next action.
- The signal is one-shot. If the next run passes cleanly, stand down.
Never
- Never claim a flake without at least one rerun.
- Never weaken or skip an assertion to make a flake disappear.
- Never mix a flake fix with unrelated changes.
- Never use a flaky result as justification for a broad refactor.
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.