agentleFS
shinprshinpr/agentic-code/.agents/skills/testing-strategy/SKILL.md

testing-strategy

Skill51 starsChanged 9 days agoMITView on GitHub

Selects the one owning test for each acceptance criterion at the boundary where its behavior is observable, using repository evidence and maintenance cost. Use when deciding integration or E2E coverage.

54 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use api-contract-design, deploy-checklist and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • MohOneXSkill

    api-contract-design

    Designs and reviews API contracts (REST, RPC, GraphQL, library interfaces) for evolvability, backward compatibility, and failure semantics. Use when defining new endpoints/interfaces, versioning an API, reviewing a schema, or deciding how breaking changes propagate to clients.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AnthropicSkill

    deploy-checklist

    Pre-deployment verification checklist. Use when about to ship a release, deploying a change with database migrations or feature flags, verifying CI status and approvals before going to production, or documenting rollback triggers ahead of time.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • xenitV1Skill

    react-patterns

    Modern React patterns and principles. Hooks, composition, performance, TypeScript best practices.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • AnthropicSkill

    tech-debt

    Identify, categorize, and prioritize technical debt. Trigger with "tech debt", "technical debt audit", "what should we refactor", "code health", or when the user asks about code quality, refactoring priorities, or maintenance backlog.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    error-handling

    统一错误处理系统。在添加 API 端点、修改错误处理、添加前端 API 调用、编写错误相关测试时使用。

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    api-design

    Guide for designing and documenting RESTful APIs. Use when asked to design an API, create endpoints, or document an API.

    Also in 9 projects that use this

  • +4 more from anthropics
  • +1 more from microsoft

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

10 rules. 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 44 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 10

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Check the existing owner: When an established test owns the claim at that boundary with assertions that detect its material failure, update …

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    use integration when the behavior is observable at a component, persistence, or process boundary.

    line 19
  3. Distinctive:

    use E2E when the behavior is observable only across the complete journey.

    line 20
  4. Distinctive:

    leave the cases of a calculation, parsing, or branching rule inside the behavior to that rule's unit test.

    line 21
  5. Distinctive:

    Compare cost: Consider setup, execution time, brittleness, maintenance, and diagnostic value using repository evidence rather than fixed …

    line 22
  6. Distinctive:

    No new integration or E2E test is a valid conclusion when existing tests already own each claim.

    line 25
  7. Distinctive:

    Before adding a test:

    line 41
  8. Distinctive:

    search the existing suite for equivalent behavior.

    line 43
  9. Distinctive:

    keep one representative proof when several candidates observe the same risk.

    line 46
  10. Distinctive:

    Every selected test traces to an observable requirement or accepted contract.

    line 61

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 44 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.

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

Test Strategy

Purpose

Select one owning test per behavioral claim at the boundary where the claim is observable, as testing defines. Candidate discovery does not create an obligation to implement every technically valid test.

Selection Process

For each acceptance criterion that may require integration or E2E proof:

  1. Name the observable boundary: Identify the interaction, persisted effect, process, or user journey that must be proven.
  2. Check the existing owner: When an established test owns the claim at that boundary with assertions that detect its material failure, update it rather than adding another.
  3. Select the owning level:
    • use integration when the behavior is observable at a component, persistence, or process boundary;
    • use E2E when the behavior is observable only across the complete journey;
    • leave the cases of a calculation, parsing, or branching rule inside the behavior to that rule's unit test.
  4. Compare cost: Consider setup, execution time, brittleness, maintenance, and diagnostic value using repository evidence rather than fixed universal scores.
  5. Retain valuable proof: Select a new test only when its regression-detection value justifies that cost.

No new integration or E2E test is a valid conclusion when existing tests already own each claim.

Priority

Prioritize proof for:

  • core user or consumer journeys;
  • shared or public contracts;
  • persisted state transitions;
  • security, authorization, compliance, or irreversible effects;
  • integrations with demonstrated failure risk.

Priority does not determine test level. Use the narrowest boundary that can observe the prioritized behavior.

Deduplication

Before adding a test:

  • search the existing suite for equivalent behavior;
  • identify overlapping proof at other levels;
  • extend existing coverage when that remains clear and maintainable;
  • keep one representative proof when several candidates observe the same risk.

Selection Record

Record only decisions needed by planning or review:

Acceptance criterion: [identifier or behavior]
Selected proof: existing | unit | integration | E2E | none
Boundary observed: [observable interaction or result]
Reason: [why this test owns the claim at this boundary]

Completion Check

  • Every selected test traces to an observable requirement or accepted contract.
  • Each claim has one owning test, and an existing owner was updated rather than duplicated.

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.

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.