recipe-add-integration-tests
Skill39 starsChanged 11 days agoMITView on GitHub
Add integration/E2E tests to existing codebase using Design Docs.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- shinpr/claude-code-workflowstheir own version, first seen Mar 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
- shinpr/claude-code-workflows★ 712same 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 repository30 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-development-guideSkill
- coding-rulesSkill
- documentation-criteriaSkill
- external-resource-contextSkill
- implementation-approachSkill
- integration-e2e-testingSkill
- llm-friendly-contextSkill
- recipe-buildSkill
- recipe-designSkill
- recipe-diagnoseSkill
- recipe-front-adjustSkill
- recipe-front-buildSkill
- recipe-front-designSkill
- recipe-front-planSkill
- recipe-front-reviewSkill
- recipe-fullstack-buildSkill
- recipe-fullstack-implementSkill
- recipe-implementSkill
- recipe-outcome-watchSkill
- recipe-planSkill
- recipe-prepare-implementationSkill
- recipe-quality-profileSkill
- recipe-reverse-engineerSkill
- recipe-reviewSkill
- recipe-update-docSkill
- requirement-convergenceSkill
- reviewee-judgmentSkill
- subagent-delegationSkill
- subagents-orchestration-guideSkill
- testingSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
6
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 8
Before loading required skills, use wc -c to size the files and set both exec_command.max_output_tokens and the outer // @exec: …
- Very specific: line 15
Invocation rule: Start each named agent with spawn_agent and fork_turns="none".
- Distinctive: line 17
Context: Test addition workflow for existing implementations
- Distinctive: line 28
Test implementation -> Invoke task-executor agent
- Distinctive: line 29
Test review -> Invoke integration-test-reviewer agent
- Distinctive: line 43
Use the llm-friendly-context Task File Contract in Step 3.
- Very specific: line 49
Treat paths under docs/ui-spec/ as UI Specs and the supplied docs/design/ paths as Design Docs.
- Distinctive: line 68
Verify returned artifact paths.
- Distinctive: line 95
Start the subagents-orchestration-guide Per-Task Change Set before invoking the executor for each task.
- Very specific: line 107
Use integration/E2E paths from taskWriteSet as the test-review input set.
- Very specific: line 109
Keep testsAdded as reporting metadata only.
- Very specific: line 138
Before the completion report, delete only the integration-test task files this recipe created for the current run.
- Distinctive: line 140
If cleanup fails, preserve completed test work and report the failed path.
≈ “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
Required Skills [LOAD BEFORE EXECUTION]
Before loading required skills, use wc -c to size the files and set both exec_command.max_output_tokens and the outer // @exec: {"max_output_tokens": N} budget to accommodate their contents, including the combined output of batched reads. Split oversized reads upfront; recover any truncated content before proceeding.
- [LOAD IF NOT ACTIVE]
testing— repository-aware test execution - [LOAD IF NOT ACTIVE]
integration-e2e-testing— value-based integration/E2E selection - [LOAD IF NOT ACTIVE]
subagents-orchestration-guide— review resolution and agent coordination - [LOAD IF NOT ACTIVE]
llm-friendly-context— task file contract
Invocation rule: Start each named agent with spawn_agent and fork_turns="none". When invoking the same named agent again within this flow, use followup_task on its existing instance with the inputs specified for the current invocation.
Context: Test addition workflow for existing implementations
Orchestrator Definition
Core Identity: Coordinate test addition, perform lightweight evidence collection and routing directly, and invoke specialists for generation, implementation, and review judgment.
Execution Plan: Reuse the active execution plan. When the workflow has multiple dependent actions and no plan exists, create one that tracks them through final verification.
Execution Method:
- Skeleton generation -> Invoke acceptance-test-generator agent
- Task file creation -> Orchestrator creates directly (minimal context usage)
- Test implementation -> Invoke task-executor agent
- Test review -> Invoke integration-test-reviewer agent
- Quality checks -> Invoke quality-fixer agent
Document paths: $ARGUMENTS
Prerequisites
- At least one Design Doc must exist (created manually or via reverse-engineer)
- Existing implementation to test
Execution Flow
Step 0: Prepare Context
Use the llm-friendly-context Task File Contract in Step 3.
Step 1: Discover and Validate Documents
Require at least one supplied, readable document path. Treat the user-provided paths in $ARGUMENTS as the complete document selection.
Treat paths under docs/ui-spec/ as UI Specs and the supplied docs/design/ paths as Design Docs. When a filename is unclear, use the document title and content; layer classification is not an execution gate because the generator returns each artifact's implementation kind.
Step 2: Skeleton Generation
Invoke acceptance-test-generator with the validated document paths from Step 1. Include UI Specs as optional UI evidence.
Generate test skeletons from the following documents:
- Design Docs: [paths]
- UI Specs: [paths, when supplied]Expected output: consume the acceptance-test-generator contract directly:
{
"status": "completed",
"artifacts": [{"path": "path", "implementationKind": "general | frontend"}]
}Verify returned artifact paths. When the selected set is empty, report that no integration/E2E skeleton was valuable and finish; otherwise continue to Step 3.
Step 3: Create Task Files
Group the returned artifacts by implementationKind and create at most one task per non-empty group:
| implementationKind | Task file | Executor | Quality fixer |
general | docs/plans/tasks/integration-tests-task-01.md | task-executor | quality-fixer |
frontend | docs/plans/tasks/integration-tests-frontend-task-01.md | task-executor-frontend | quality-fixer-frontend |
Populate the llm-friendly-context Task File Contract with:
Source Plan Tasks: N/A — standalone test-addition flowImplementation Outcome: implement every skeleton in this task's artifact group as a runnable integration/E2E testGoverning Sources: the supplied Design Doc/UI Spec paths and the ACs cited by the skeletonsTarget Files: thepathof every artifact in this task's groupInvestigation Targets: the governing sections, generated skeletons, and one representative existing test per selected laneImplementation Steps: implement the skeleton proof obligations, run their focused commands, and keep the selected boundaries observableOperation Verification Methods: repository commands and observable pass conditions for the selected lanesVerification Focus: when one material false-green condition controls completion, copy its Primary failure and smallest observable proof checkCompletion Criteria: every selected skeleton is executable and its observable checks pass
Output: "Task file created at [path]. Ready for Step 4."
Step 4: Test Implementation
Start the subagents-orchestration-guide Per-Task Change Set before invoking the executor for each task.
For each task file from Step 3, invoke the executor from its table row with: "Task file: [task file path from Step 3]. Implement tests following the task file."
Inspect the executor result and repository diff, then add its paths to taskWriteSet. Resolve an incomplete or unusable implementation through Orchestrator Escalation Resolution.
Execute one task file at a time through Steps 4 -> 5 -> 6 -> 7 before starting the next.
Expected output: completion or escalation state, filesModified, testsAdded, requiresTestReview, and operation-verification evidence
Step 5: Test Review
Use integration/E2E paths from taskWriteSet as the test-review input set.
Invoke integration-test-reviewer with changedTestFiles, diffBase, skeletonFiles: [artifact paths in the current task], and taskFile.
Keep testsAdded as reporting metadata only.
Consume the reviewer decision, actionable findings, and governing basis. Apply Orchestrator Escalation Resolution when the result is blocked or cannot support the next action.
Step 6: Apply Review Fixes
Review reception: Unnecessary repairs create lasting work. Before assigning a fix, use Review Resolution to judge no change, removal or narrowing, and reuse first; record why any retained or added mechanism is necessary.
Proceed when the review passes. When it contains actionable revision findings, apply Review Resolution with the layer-appropriate executor, add repair paths to taskWriteSet, and rerun the reviewer.
Step 7: Quality Check
Invoke the quality fixer from the current task's Step 3 table row with task_file, filesModified: taskWriteSet, and the executor's operation-verification evidence.
Expected output: status (stub_detected/pass/blocked)
Step 8: Commit
On quality pass, add its filesModified, reconcile and commit the Per-Task Change Set, then mark the temporary task file complete. Repair stubs through the current task's executor and accumulate their paths; resolve blocked results through Orchestrator Escalation Resolution.
Completion Criteria
- Design Doc validated and located
- acceptance-test-generator returned
status: completed - Every returned artifact was implemented, reviewed, quality-checked, and committed
- Task files created by this recipe deleted from
docs/plans/tasks/
Final Cleanup
Before the completion report, delete only the integration-test task files this recipe created for the current run. Their work is committed; docs/plans/ is ephemeral working state.
If cleanup fails, preserve completed test work and report the failed path.
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.

