agentleFS
tuisttuist/agent-plugin/skills/compare-test-runs/SKILL.md

compare-test-runs

Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Compares two test runs to identify new failures, newly flaky tests, fixed tests, and duration regressions. Can be invoked with test run IDs, dashboard URLs, or branch names.

2 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Steady: 0 new projects took it in the last 4 weeks, none the 4 weeks before.thin data

Week of Sep 13: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 20: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 27: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 4: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 11: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 18: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 25: 0 new projectsWeek of Nov 1: 0 new projects
Sep 2026Oct 2026Nov 2026
New projects taking a version of this file each week, over the 8 weeks our latest run read: only 0 in all, so this is a hint, not a trend.

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Run tuist test show <id> --json for both base and head test runs.

    line 12
  2. Very specific:

    Run tuist test module list <test-run-id> --json and tuist test suite list <test-run-id> --json to get module and suite breakdowns.

    line 13
  3. Very specific:

    Run tuist test case run list <identifier> --json to get individual test case results.

    line 14
  4. Distinctive:

    If no base is provided, use the project's default branch (usually main).

    line 43
  5. Distinctive:

    If no head is provided, detect the current git branch.

    line 44
  6. Distinctive:

    After fetching both test runs, compare:

    line 48

≈ “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.

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

Compare Test Runs

Quick Start

You'll typically receive two test run identifiers. Follow these steps:

  1. Run tuist test show <id> --json for both base and head test runs.
  2. Run tuist test module list <test-run-id> --json and tuist test suite list <test-run-id> --json to get module and suite breakdowns.
  3. Run tuist test case run list <identifier> --json to get individual test case results.
  4. Compare failures, flaky tests, durations, and overall status.
  5. Inspect failing test cases with tuist test case run show <id> --json.
  6. Summarize findings with actionable recommendations.

Step 1: Resolve Test Runs

If base/head are test run IDs or dashboard URLs

Fetch each directly:

tuist test show <base-id> --json
tuist test show <head-id> --json

If base/head are branch names

List recent test runs on each branch to identify test run IDs:

tuist test list --git-branch <base-branch> --json --page-size 5
tuist test list --git-branch <head-branch> --json --page-size 5

Pick the latest test run ID from each branch's results.

Defaults

  • If no base is provided, use the project's default branch (usually main).
  • If no head is provided, detect the current git branch.

Step 2: Compare Top-Level Metrics

After fetching both test runs, compare:

MetricWhat to check
statusFlag if base passed but head failed
durationFlag if head is >10% slower
total_test_countNote if test count changed (new or removed tests)
failed_test_countCompare failure counts
flaky_test_countCompare flaky counts
avg_test_durationFlag significant changes

Step 3: Get Module and Suite Breakdowns

Fetch module and suite-level results for both test runs to understand which areas regressed:

tuist test module list <base-test-run-id> --json
tuist test module list <head-test-run-id> --json

tuist test suite list <base-test-run-id> --json
tuist test suite list <head-test-run-id> --json

Match modules and suites by name across both runs to identify areas with new failures or duration regressions.

Step 4: Get Individual Test Case Results

Fetch test case runs for both test runs:

tuist test case run list <identifier> --json --page-size 100

Match test cases by their name + module_name + suite_name across both runs.

Step 5: Classify Changes

Group test cases into categories:

  1. New failures: Tests that passed in base but failed in head.
  2. Fixed tests: Tests that failed in base but passed in head.
  3. Newly flaky: Tests not flaky in base but flaky in head.
  4. No longer flaky: Tests that were flaky in base but stable in head.
  5. New tests: Tests present in head but not in base.
  6. Removed tests: Tests present in base but not in head.
  7. Duration regressions: Tests with >50% duration increase.

Step 6: Inspect Failures

For each new failure, get detailed information:

tuist test case run show <test-case-run-id> --json

Key fields to examine:

  • failures[].message -- the assertion or error message
  • failures[].path -- source file path
  • failures[].line_number -- exact line of failure
  • failures[].issue_type -- type of issue
  • repetitions -- if present, shows retry behavior (flaky detection)
  • crash_report -- crash data if test runner crashed

Step 7: Inspect Attachments

The tuist test case run show output includes attachment and crash report information. Review:

  • Screenshots or UI test artifacts
  • Log files or crash reports
  • Any diagnostic data attached to failing runs

Summary Format

Produce a summary with:

  1. Overall verdict: Better, worse, or neutral compared to base.
  2. New failures: List each with failure message, file path, and line number.
  3. New flaky tests: List with flakiness context.
  4. Fixed tests: List tests that are now passing.
  5. Duration: Overall and notable per-test regressions.
  6. Recommendations: Actionable next steps for each issue.

Example:

Test Run Comparison: base (run-123 on main) vs head (run-456 on feature-x)

Status: success -> failure -- REGRESSION
Duration: 120.5s -> 145.2s (+21%)
Tests: 342 -> 345 (3 new tests)
Failures: 0 -> 2 (2 new failures)
Flaky: 1 -> 3 (2 newly flaky)

New Failures:
1. AuthModuleTests/LoginTests/test_login_with_expired_token
   Message: "Expected status 401, got 500"
   File: Tests/AuthModuleTests/LoginTests.swift:42
   Likely cause: Server error handling changed for expired tokens

2. NetworkTests/RetryTests/test_retry_on_timeout
   Message: "Timed out waiting for retry"
   File: Tests/NetworkTests/RetryTests.swift:87
   Likely cause: Timeout threshold too low after network layer refactor

Newly Flaky:
1. CacheTests/WriteCacheTests/test_concurrent_writes (flaky in 3/5 runs)

Recommendations:
- Fix expired token handling in AuthModule
- Increase timeout in RetryTests or mock the network layer
- Investigate concurrent write synchronization in CacheTests

Done Checklist

  • Resolved both base and head test runs
  • Compared top-level metrics
  • Fetched module and suite breakdowns for both runs
  • Identified new failures, fixed tests, and flaky changes
  • Inspected failure details for new failures
  • Provided actionable recommendations with file paths

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.