agentleFS
murillo-consultingmurillo-consulting/cli-skills/cli-audit-test/SKILL.md

cli-audit-test

Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Audit test plan quality and maturity. Scores coverage, techniques, pyramid balance, negative testing, NFR, automation, CI integration. Use when reviewing a test plan, test strategy, test suite structure, or saying 'audit tests', 'test quality', 'test plan review', 'test maturity', 'are my tests good enough', 'test scoring', 'test pyramid'. Also triggers on 'test coverage', 'test gaps', 'missing tests'.

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 4 are 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.

  • 4

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    A test plan is a contract with quality: Every dimension left vague is a risk accepted silently.

    line 31
  2. Very specific:

    Empty: search for test plans in the project root, then fall back to tests/ directory analysis

    line 39
  3. Very specific:

    Read project manifest (Cargo.toml, package.json, etc.) for test dependencies

    line 47
  4. Very specific:

    Read references/anti-patterns.md for the 11 anti-patterns with detection rules and recommendations.

    line 87
  5. Very specific:

    Use the output format below.

    line 99
  6. Distinctive:

    Evidence-based: Every score needs a file reference, count, or concrete observation.

    line 151
  7. Distinctive:

    Actionable output: Every gap must come with a concrete, sized recommendation.

    line 157

≈ “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.

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

Optimization: This skill uses on-demand loading. Heavy content lives in references/ and is loaded only when needed.

Language rule: Skill instructions are written in English. When generating user-facing output, detect the project's primary language (from README, comments, docs, commit messages) and produce the report in that language. If the project is bilingual, ask the user which language to use before proceeding.

Audit Test — Test Plan Quality & Maturity Scorer

Evaluate a test plan or test suite against ISTQB standards, TMMi maturity model, and industry best practices.

"A test plan that only says 'we will test' without specifying which techniques and why is a major red flag." — ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0

Core Principle

A test plan is a contract with quality. Every dimension left vague is a risk accepted silently. This skill measures how explicitly and completely that contract is defined, using a 12-dimension framework calibrated on ISTQB, TMMi, and proven industry patterns.

Input

$ARGUMENTS is the target to audit:

  • Test plan document (.md, .txt, .adoc, .pdf): audit the plan as written
  • Tests directory (tests/, tests/e2e/, etc.): infer the plan from the test structure, files, and config
  • Empty: search for test plans in the project root, then fall back to tests/ directory analysis

Input Discovery

  1. Glob for test plan documents: **/test-plan*, **/test-strategy*, **/TESTING*
  2. Glob for test directories: **/tests/**, **/test/**, **/e2e/**, **/spec/**
  3. Glob for CI config: .github/workflows/*, .gitlab-ci.yml, Jenkinsfile, justfile
  4. Glob for test config: **/pict/**, **/fixtures/**, **/mocks/**, **/toxiproxy*
  5. Read project manifest (Cargo.toml, package.json, etc.) for test dependencies

13-Dimension Framework

Score each dimension 0-4, then compute a weighted final score. Read references/dimensions.md for detailed scoring criteria, evidence patterns, and per-dimension guidance.

A test plan's reach can be read against the shared T0-T4/M0 ladder (../shared/gate-ladder.md): how far up the rungs (static contract → component → fresh deploy → day-2 ops → stress) does the suite actually go? Most plans stall at T1-T2.

#DimensionWeightKey question
D1Scope & Objectives7%Is what's tested (and what's not) explicit?
D2Test Design Techniques12%Are recognized techniques (EP, BVA, pairwise...) used?
D3Pyramid Balance7%Is the unit > integration > E2E ratio healthy?
D4Coverage & Traceability11%Can you trace each requirement to a test?
D5Negative Testing & Security8%Are error paths and security invariants tested?
D6Non-Functional Testing9%Performance, security, accessibility, reliability?
D7Risk Analysis & Prioritization7%Do critical features get more test effort?
D8Automation Strategy9%What's automated vs manual, and why?
D9CI/CD Integration7%Do tests run on commit with quality gates?
D10Entry/Exit Criteria5%When is testing "done"? Measurable thresholds?
D11Exploratory Testing5%Structured charters and time-boxed sessions?
D12Environment & Data5%Automated setup, deterministic data, mocks?
D13Semantic Drift Detection8%Are silent behavioral changes caught before merge?

Workflow

Step 1 — Discover test assets

Glob for test files, CI configs, test frameworks. Build a test inventory: total files by type, directories and purpose, CI jobs, frameworks detected.

Step 2 — Classify test files

For each test file/directory, classify by level (unit/integration/E2E/acceptance), technique, type (functional/security/performance), and polarity (positive/negative). Read references/techniques.md for technique detection heuristics.

Step 3 — Score all 13 dimensions

For each dimension: collect evidence (file references, counts, patterns), assign score 0-4 with justification, note strengths and gaps. Read references/dimensions.md for detailed scoring criteria.

Step 4 — Detect anti-patterns

Read references/anti-patterns.md for the 11 anti-patterns with detection rules and recommendations. Flag with severity and evidence.

Step 5 — Compute final score

Final Score = Σ (dimension_score / 4 × weight × 100)

Normalize to 0-100 scale. Read references/scoring-framework.md for TMMi mapping and benchmarks.

Step 6 — Generate report

Use the output format below. Finding tier and confidence semantics are canonical in ../shared/triage.md (Tier 3/2/1 + GRADE + triangulation). D-dimension findings carry tier and confidence so cli-cycle can aggregate without re-parsing.

Output Format

# Test Plan Quality Audit — {project-name}

**Date:** {date}
**Target:** {what was audited}
**Final Score:** {X}/100 — {verdict}
**TMMi Equivalent:** Level {N}

## Test Inventory

| Type | Count | Examples |
|------|-------|---------|
| Unit tests | N | `src/*/tests.rs` |
| Integration tests | N | `tests/integration/` |
| E2E tests | N | `tests/e2e/tests/` |
| Total | N | |

### Test Pyramid Visualization
(ASCII pyramid showing shape: Pyramid|Diamond|Ice Cream Cone|Inverted)

## Dimension Scores

| # | Dimension | Weight | Score | /4 | Weighted | Verdict |
|---|-----------|--------|-------|----|----------|---------|
| D1-D13 rows... |
| | **Total** | **100%** | | | **X.X** | |

### Techniques Detected
(Table: Technique | Evidence | Applied to)

## Anti-Patterns Detected
(Table: Anti-Pattern | Severity | Evidence | Recommendation)

## Strengths / Gaps & Recommendations / Maturity Assessment

Quality Thresholds

RangeVerdict
86-100Excellent — Comprehensive, mature, CI-integrated
71-85Good — Solid plan with minor gaps
51-70Acceptable — Functional but needs improvement
26-50Insufficient — Major gaps, significant risk
0-25Critical — Plan needs complete rework

Rules for the Auditor

  1. Evidence-based: Every score needs a file reference, count, or concrete observation.
  2. Proportional: Scale judgment to project size. A 5-test project differs from a 118-test enterprise suite.
  3. Technique-aware: Recognize techniques even when not explicitly named. tests/budget/ with 79%, 80%, 100%, 101% values IS BVA.
  4. Structure over documentation: A well-organized test directory IS a test plan. Judge by substance, not ceremony.
  5. Score honestly: 100/100 means world-class. 70/100 is genuinely good. 50/100 is typical.
  6. Anti-patterns > missing features: Detecting an ice cream cone is more valuable than noting a missing charter.
  7. Actionable output: Every gap must come with a concrete, sized recommendation.
  8. Gotchas — read ../gotchas.md before producing output to avoid known mistakes.

Integration with other cli-* skills

SkillRelationship
cli-audit-xrayProduces optimization cards whose validation methods become concrete unit, property, benchmark, or trace-comparison test requirements
cli-audit-codeScores code quality. cli-audit-test scores test quality
cli-audit-docScores doc quality. cli-audit-test checks test documentation
cli-audit-driftChecks behavioral conformity via contracts. cli-audit-test checks test-level drift detection (D13)
cli-audit-syncVerifies doc-code coherence. cli-audit-test verifies test-requirement coherence
cli-forge-schemaCan visualize test plan as diagrams (pyramid, state machines)
cli-forge-perfD6 (NFR) and D7 (risk) cover perf as intent; cli-forge-perf provides the executable bench harness (A/B, distribution, permutation test) that turns the intent into a non-regression gate
cli-cycleCalls cli-audit-test as part of the full project review; emit .agents/cli-audit-test.json per ../shared/result-schema.md for orchestrator aggregation
cli-audit-dataDefines PostgreSQL-specific proof cases; this skill scores their place in the overall test strategy

Dynamic Handoffs

Condition detectedRecommendWhy
Tests cover performance intent but no concrete code path or rewrite candidate is identified/cli-audit-xrayFind the semantic hot path and produce validation-ready optimization cards
No negative tests for security features/cli-audit-code on security modulesVerify C9 coverage
Test pyramid inverted (too many E2E, few unit)/cli-audit-tangleFind god functions that resist unit testing
Missing drift detection in tests (D13 low)/cli-audit-driftBootstrap CONTRACTS.md
CI has no test stage/cli-forge-pipelineAdd test jobs to pipeline
D6 (perf/NFR) low or no perf budget gate/cli-forge-perfCatalogue + harnais A/B exécutable pour transformer le SLO en test de non-régression
PostgreSQL/SQLx tests use only mocks/SQLite or omit synchronized concurrency and N-1 migrations/cli-audit-dataDerive the required database proof from criticality and invariants

Rule: Recommend, don't auto-execute.

What this skill does NOT do

  • Does not run tests — it audits the plan/structure
  • Does not generate tests — it identifies gaps
  • Does not replace manual review — it provides a structured framework
  • Does not check test correctness — it checks test strategy

Reference Sources

  • ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0 (2023)
  • TMMi Framework R1.2
  • ISO 25010
  • La Taverne du Testeur — niveaux de test, pyramide, smoke tests, Cassandre
  • Codepipes — 13 Software Testing Anti-patterns
  • Mike Cohn — Test Pyramid

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.

Reviews can't be read right now.

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.