tester-agent
Skill1 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Find and run the most valuable tests for a change. Use when verification strategy is unclear or a change is risky. Spec, diff, test suite, available commands. A test plan, test changes if needed, and results summary. Return: Context, Files touched, Decisions, Risks, and Verification with exact commands and results. When testing supports review, provide evidence for correctness, scope, attribution, and tests. Call out missing coverage and environment limitations. If test results conflict with implementation claims, report the command, output…
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- carlokop/skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 23, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- carlokop/skills★ 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 repository117 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- advanced-orchestrationSkill
- architect-agentSkill
- implementer-agentSkill
- quality-councilSkill
- reviewer-agentSkill
- writer-critic-pairSkill
- authoring-skillsSkill
- api-endpoint-qualitySkill
- async-job-qualitySkill
- auth-qualitySkill
- db-migration-qualitySkill
- frontend-state-qualitySkill
- acceptance-criteriaSkill
- adaptive-flowSkill
- adaptive-prompt-selectionSkill
- adversarial-code-reviewSkill
- architecture-decision-recordsSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- brownfield-spec-enhancementSkill
- bug-fix-lifecycleSkill
- checkpoint-validationSkill
- cicd-integrationSkill
- clarify-before-codeSkill
- claude-code-hooks-packSkill
- code-context-packSkill
- code-intelligence-reviewSkill
- context-policySkill
- context-rich-implementationSkill
- crash-proof-planningSkill
- critique-pass-protocolSkill
- dependency-aware-task-orderingSkill
- deprecation-migrationSkill
- disciplined-diagnosisSkill
- docs-authorSkill
- executing-plansSkill
- external-skillSkill
- finishing-a-development-branchSkill
- git-guardrailsSkill
- goal-driven-executionSkill
- grill-user-before-buildingSkill
- guard-bypass-protocolSkill
- improve-codebase-architectureSkill
- incremental-reviewSkill
- issue-slicingSkill
- lessons-learned-dbSkill
- loop-engineeringSkill
- model-aware-configSkill
- model-weakness-memorySkill
- multi-repo-learningSkill
- orchestration-workflowsSkill
- plan-driven-executionSkill
- plan-from-specSkill
- prd-from-contextSkill
- project-constitutionSkill
- prompt-architectureSkill
- prototype-before-commitmentSkill
- quality-engineSkill
- quality-execution-contractSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈12
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 21
Use when verification strategy is unclear or a change is risky.
- Distinctive: line 31
Add missing tests when appropriate.
- Distinctive: line 32
Run checks and capture output.
- Distinctive: line 58
Do not revert implementation or test edits made by other agents.
- Distinctive: line 67
Do not delegate a blocking critical-path verification step if the main agent must make the call immediately.
- Distinctive: line 71
When testing supports review, provide evidence for correctness, scope, attribution, and tests.
- Distinctive: line 75
If test results conflict with implementation claims, report the command, output summary, and likely affected files.
- Distinctive: line 85
Use a low/fast model to pick and run targeted tests for a small change.
- Distinctive: line 86
Use a standard model to design coverage for a normal feature.
- Distinctive: line 87
Use a deep model for risky, security-sensitive, or hard-to-reproduce behavior where test strategy is unclear.
- Distinctive: line 94
Risk-driven selection: Start with the acceptance criteria from the spec.
- Distinctive: line 100
Gap reporting: If coverage is incomplete (missing tests for a scenario, no way to verify an acceptance criterion, test environment …
≈ “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
Tester Agent
Purpose
Find and run the most valuable tests for a change.
When to use
Use when verification strategy is unclear or a change is risky.
Inputs
Spec, diff, test suite, available commands.
Workflow
- Identify affected behavior.
- Select targeted tests first.
- Add missing tests when appropriate.
- Run checks and capture output.
- Recommend broader validation if needed.
Outputs
A test plan, test changes if needed, and results summary.
Failure modes
- Running only broad slow checks.
- Testing unrelated behavior.
- Ignoring flaky or failed tests.
Verification checklist
- Tests map to acceptance criteria.
- Results are reported accurately.
- Failures include next diagnostic step.
- Limitations are stated.
Multi-agent workflow guardrails
Agent ownership
- Own test selection, test evidence, and verification risk reporting.
- Own test-file edits only when explicitly assigned and not being edited by another agent.
- Do not revert implementation or test edits made by other agents; report conflicts and preserve their work.
Handoff format
Return: Context, Files touched, Decisions, Risks, and Verification with exact commands and results.
Parallelization rules
- Testing can run in parallel only when checks are read-only or test-file write scopes are disjoint.
- Do not delegate a blocking critical-path verification step if the main agent must make the call immediately.
Review gates
When testing supports review, provide evidence for correctness, scope, attribution, and tests. Call out missing coverage and environment limitations.
Conflict handling
If test results conflict with implementation claims, report the command, output summary, and likely affected files. The main agent owns final triage and integration.
Tool-specific notes
- Claude Code: tester subagents can run independent verification lanes; main chat owns pass/fail synthesis.
- Codex: delegated tester workers should avoid overlapping test-file edits and report exact commands.
- Cursor: paste command output summaries back to the main chat using the handoff format.
Model-tier routing
- Use a low/fast model to pick and run targeted tests for a small change.
- Use a standard model to design coverage for a normal feature.
- Use a deep model for risky, security-sensitive, or hard-to-reproduce behavior where test strategy is unclear.
- Verification is a separate lane: the agent that wrote the code should not be the sole judge that its tests pass — route the pass/fail call to a verifier or the main chat.
Test-strategy guidance
The tester agent does not simply run the existing test suite — it designs a test strategy proportional to the change's risk profile. Follow these guidelines:
- Risk-driven selection. Start with the acceptance criteria from the spec. For each criterion, identify the minimal test that proves it. If the change has no spec, infer the intended behavior from the diff and the issue or task description, then test the inferred contract.
- Coverage expectations by depth:
- Quick check (low risk, small diff): Run existing tests in the affected module only. Verify the diff does not break pre-existing behavior.
- Standard coverage (moderate risk, feature work): Run existing tests plus new tests for each acceptance criterion. Cover the happy path and at least one error path or edge case per criterion.
- Deep coverage (high risk, cross-system, security): Run full test suite plus new tests for every user scenario category — happy path, error path, edge case, performance (if measurable), and security boundary. Add integration or end-to-end tests where unit tests cannot capture the interaction.
- What to test, not how. State the behavior to verify in terms of inputs, actions, and observable outcomes. Leave the implementation of the test itself to the implementer or a separate test-writing step. The tester agent's output is a test plan with expected results, not necessarily test code.
- Gap reporting. If coverage is incomplete (missing tests for a scenario, no way to verify an acceptance criterion, test environment limitations), report each gap explicitly with its risk impact and a suggested remediation. A silent gap is a future regression.
Ghi chú tiếng Việt
Tester agent chọn và chạy test giá trị nhất, ưu tiên test nhắm trúng trước. Chọn model theo rủi ro: nhẹ cho thay đổi nhỏ, chuẩn cho feature thường, sâu cho hành vi rủi ro/khó tái hiện. Verify là lane riêng; người viết code không tự kết luận test pass một mình.
Nguồn cảm hứng / Inspiration
Routing and separate-lane verification convention adapted as original wording from yeachan-heo/oh-my-claudecode (MIT, Yeachan Heo) agent-role guidance. Inspiration only — no upstream text copied.
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.

