feature-testing
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when validating a completed feature against its acceptance criteria through integrated behavior.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- LanternOps/breezetheir own version, first seen Oct 9, 2026
- Cem-Tas96/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 19, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- LanternOps/breeze★ 169same name
- Cem-Tas96/claude-skills★ 1same 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 repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- templates/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- branch-safelySkill
- deployment-decisionsSkill
- deploySkill
- deploy-vercelSkill
- deploy-vpsSkill
- documentationSkill
- e2e-testingSkill
- monitoringSkill
- orchestrateSkill
- quality-reviewSkill
- requirements-gatheringSkill
- solution-designSkill
- task-breakdownSkill
- ui-uxSkill
- unit-testingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈5
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 12
New feature: after unit tests pass, verify the feature meets each acceptance criterion through observable behavior.
- Distinctive: line 13
Bug fix: verify the original broken behavior is fixed and the surrounding feature still works correctly.
- Distinctive: line 37
Use the project's existing test framework for automated feature tests when available.
- Distinctive: line 41
Keep the test scope bounded to the feature.
- Distinctive: line 45
Run the relevant feature test command if the project has one (integration tests, API tests, component tests).
≈ “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
Feature Testing
Validate that the completed feature works as intended from a user's perspective, covering normal flow, failure paths, and relevant edge cases. Feature tests bridge the gap between unit tests and full end-to-end tests.
When to write
- New feature: after unit tests pass, verify the feature meets each acceptance criterion through observable behavior.
- Bug fix: verify the original broken behavior is fixed and the surrounding feature still works correctly.
- Changed behavior: re-test affected acceptance criteria when existing behavior is modified.
What to test
- Acceptance criteria: map every criterion from the ticket to an observable behavior and verify it.
- Normal flow: the happy path a user would follow to accomplish the goal.
- Failure flow: what happens when the user provides invalid input, is unauthorized, or a dependency fails.
- Validation paths: form validation, API validation, permission checks, boundary conditions.
- UI-specific checks (when applicable):
- Keyboard navigation: tab order, enter/space activation, escape to close.
- Accessible names: buttons and inputs have meaningful labels or aria-labels.
- Responsive behavior: layout works at common breakpoints (mobile, tablet, desktop).
- Visual states: loading, empty, error, success states are all handled.
- Integration points: correct data flow between components, modules, or services involved in the feature.
What not to test
- Internal implementation details (which function was called, how state is stored).
- Third-party service behavior (mock those; test your integration contract).
- Areas unrelated to the feature scope.
How to write
- Use the project's existing test framework for automated feature tests when available.
- For manual feature tests, write short reproducible steps with expected outcomes.
- Each test should map to exactly one acceptance criterion or risk area.
- Include both positive and negative cases.
- Keep the test scope bounded to the feature; do not expand into unrelated areas.
Running
- Run the relevant feature test command if the project has one (integration tests, API tests, component tests).
- For manual checks, execute each step and record the actual result.
- Record the exact command or steps run and their outcomes.
Evidence for quality
Give quality the list of acceptance criteria tested, the method used (automated or manual), actual results for each, and any criteria that could not be verified. Do not invent results. Keep the evidence concise and factual.
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.

