scaffold-dotnet-test-project
Skill4 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Create the first .NET test project. USE FOR: "solution has no tests", xUnit tests, Tests.csproj/ProjectReference, add an omitted test project to .sln/.slnx/.slnf, central packages, or tests missing from CI. DO NOT USE FOR: a suitable project already registered in the requested build entry point (stop) or migration.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- microsoft/testfxtheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- microsoft/testfx★ 1.1ksame 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 repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- coverage-analysisSkill
- directory-build-organizationSkill
- msbuild-antipatternsSkill
- nuget-release-governanceSkill
- roslyn-analyzer-developmentSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 7 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈10
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
7
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
Create the smallest test project that fits the repository's existing build and test conventions, wire it to the correct production project …
- Very specific: line 31
Use writing-mstest-tests after the project exists.
- Distinctive: line 59
Treat a test project as suitable only when its target framework can reference the production project and its purpose matches the requested …
- Distinctive: line 63
No-op stop condition: when a suitable project already exists and is registered in the requested build entry point, do not repair, …
- Very specific: line 70
Default to one test project per production project, named according to repository convention (Foo.Tests, Foo.UnitTests, and so on).
- Distinctive: line 83
Never mix frameworks in one test project.
- Very specific: line 88
Use the matching dotnet new template (xunit, nunit, or mstest) rather than hand-writing template boilerplate.
- Very specific: line 92
Add a ProjectReference to each production project directly exercised by the planned tests.
- Distinctive: line 94
Remove template sample tests that do not test repository behavior.
- Very specific: line 107
Prefer dotnet add <test-project> reference <production-project> for project references.
- Distinctive: line 118
No solution artifact: keep the existing project-oriented workflow.
- Distinctive: line 121
Do not substitute a different solution file because it is easier to edit.
- Distinctive: line 130
avoid network, wall-clock, process, and real filesystem dependencies.
- Distinctive: line 138
Run, in this order:
- Very specific: line 144
If the direct command passes but the harness-level command discovers no new test, the scaffolding is incomplete.
- Very specific: line 146
Do not claim success from dotnet build alone.
- Distinctive: line 159
If validation is blocked, report the exact failing command and first actionable error.
≈ “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
Scaffold a .NET Test Project
Create the smallest test project that fits the repository's existing build and test conventions, wire it to the correct production project and build entry point, and prove solution-level test discovery sees it. This skill scaffolds the container for tests; it does not invent a solution-wide test architecture.
When to Use
- A .NET solution or project has production code but no suitable test project.
- A user asks to "set up tests" or "add a test project" from a vague starting point.
- Tests pass when the new
.csprojis targeted directly but CI cannot discover it. - A multi-project solution needs a bounded test project for one production project.
When Not to Use
- A compatible test project already references the target production project.
Reuse it and continue with
code-testing-agent. - The request is specifically about authoring or modernizing MSTest test code.
Use
writing-mstest-testsafter the project exists. - The repository's current build is broken for an unrelated reason. Report that blocker; do not redesign project structure to hide it.
- The user asks to migrate xUnit, NUnit, MSTest, TUnit, VSTest, or MTP.
Inputs
| Input | Required | Description |
| Repository or solution path | No | Discover from the current workspace when omitted |
| Production project | No | Infer the narrowest project in the requested scope |
| Test framework | No | Use an explicit choice; otherwise infer repository convention |
| Build entry point | No | Existing .sln, .slnx, .slnf, or project graph used by CI |
Workflow
Step 1: Establish the repository contract
Inspect only the files needed to answer these questions:
- Which production project is in scope?
- What command does CI or the repository use to build and test?
- Does a suitable test project already reference that production project?
- Which test framework and runner do neighboring test projects use?
- Are package versions centrally managed by
Directory.Packages.props,Directory.Build.props,global.json, or an MSBuild SDK declaration? - Which target framework(s) must the test project compile against?
Treat a test project as suitable only when its target framework can reference the production project and its purpose matches the requested layer. Do not create a second test project merely because its name differs from your preferred name.
No-op stop condition: when a suitable project already exists and is registered in the requested build entry point, do not repair, normalize, convert, or replace the solution. If the user did not ask for tests yet, report the existing project path and stop with the workspace byte-for-byte unchanged.
Step 2: Choose one bounded project
Default to one test project per production project, named according to repository
convention (Foo.Tests, Foo.UnitTests, and so on). For a vague multi-project
request, start with the project that owns the user-visible behavior or has the
highest-value untested logic; do not create one test project per source project
without evidence that the repository wants that layout.
Match, in order:
- The user's explicit framework choice.
- Existing test projects in the same repository.
- Repository-wide package/SDK conventions.
- A standard SDK template only when the repository provides no convention.
Never mix frameworks in one test project. Never add package versions directly when central package management supplies them.
Step 3: Scaffold and reference the target
Use the matching dotnet new template (xunit, nunit, or mstest) rather than
hand-writing template boilerplate. Then make only the repository-specific edits:
- Align target framework, nullable, implicit-usings, runner, and package style.
- Add a
ProjectReferenceto each production project directly exercised by the planned tests. Do not reference every project in the solution. - Remove template sample tests that do not test repository behavior.
For xUnit v3 projects that the repository runs through dotnet test, preserve or
add both:
<OutputType>Exe</OutputType>
<TestingPlatformDotnetTestSupport>true</TestingPlatformDotnetTestSupport>OutputType=Exe alone makes the self-hosted runner work with dotnet run; it is
not evidence that the repository's dotnet test command can discover the tests.
Prefer dotnet add <test-project> reference <production-project> for project
references. Inspect the resulting project file before continuing.
Step 4: Register with the real build entry point
Creating a .csproj is not enough. Add it to the exact solution artifact used by
the repository:
.slnor.slnx:dotnet sln <solution> add <test-project>.slnf: add the project to the underlying solution and include it in the filter used by the requested/CI test command.- No solution artifact: keep the existing project-oriented workflow. Do not create a solution solely for aesthetics unless the user asked for one.
Do not substitute a different solution file because it is easier to edit.
Step 5: Add a real smoke test
Replace template examples with the smallest smoke suite requested. The tests must:
- instantiate or invoke a real symbol from the referenced production project;
- assert a concrete result, not only non-null/truthiness;
- avoid network, wall-clock, process, and real filesystem dependencies.
These tests prove the project reference and discovery path. Stop after every
behavior explicitly named by the user is covered; extra boundary permutations
are out of scope here and belong to code-testing-agent.
Step 6: Verify direct and harness-level execution
Run, in this order:
dotnet test <test-project>to isolate scaffolding failures.- The repository's solution/root test command to prove CI discovery.
- A solution/project listing command to confirm the new project is registered.
If the direct command passes but the harness-level command discovers no new
test, the scaffolding is incomplete. Fix registration before reporting success.
Do not claim success from dotnet build alone.
Output Contract
Report a compact table:
| Requirement | Evidence |
| Test project created/reused | Project path |
| Production reference | Referenced .csproj path |
| Build registration | .sln/.slnx/.slnf entry or project-oriented command |
| Test discovery | Passing harness-level command and discovered test |
If validation is blocked, report the exact failing command and first actionable error. Do not describe an unrun command as successful.
Validation
- A suitable existing test project was ruled out before creating another.
- Framework, runner, target framework, and package style match the repository.
- Project references cover only the production projects under test.
- Central package management was preserved.
- Template sample tests were removed.
- At least one real deterministic test asserts a concrete behavior.
- The test project passes directly.
- The repository's solution/root command discovers and runs the new test.
Common Pitfalls
| Pitfall | Corrective action |
| Creating a project that CI never sees | Register it with the exact solution/filter used by CI and run that command |
| Picking a favorite framework | Infer the repository convention before using a default |
| Adding package versions under CPM | Add versionless references and keep versions in Directory.Packages.props |
| Referencing the whole solution | Reference only projects whose APIs the tests compile against |
Keeping UnitTest1 | Replace it with a concrete test of repository behavior |
| Creating parallel unit/integration projects from a vague ask | Start with one bounded project; expand only for a demonstrated boundary |
| Treating a green build as test discovery | Run the harness-level test command and observe the test |
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.

