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
Most recently taken up by
- tuist/tuistword for word, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- tuist/agent-skillsword for word, first seen Mar 27, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 2
- tuist/tuist★ 5.9k100% same
- tuist/agent-skills★ 35100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
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 repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- analyze-selective-testingSkill
- compare-buildsSkill
- compare-bundlesSkill
- compare-cache-runsSkill
- compare-generationsSkill
- compare-gradle-buildsSkill
- compare-test-caseSkill
- debug-generated-projectSkill
- fix-flaky-testsSkill
- generated-projectsSkill
- migrateSkill
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
- Very specific: line 12
Run tuist test show <id> --json for both base and head test runs.
- Very specific: line 13
Run tuist test module list <test-run-id> --json and tuist test suite list <test-run-id> --json to get module and suite breakdowns.
- Very specific: line 14
Run tuist test case run list <identifier> --json to get individual test case results.
- Distinctive: line 43
If no base is provided, use the project's default branch (usually main).
- Distinctive: line 44
If no head is provided, detect the current git branch.
- Distinctive: line 48
After fetching both test runs, compare:
≈ “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
Compare Test Runs
Quick Start
You'll typically receive two test run identifiers. Follow these steps:
- Run
tuist test show <id> --jsonfor both base and head test runs. - Run
tuist test module list <test-run-id> --jsonandtuist test suite list <test-run-id> --jsonto get module and suite breakdowns. - Run
tuist test case run list <identifier> --jsonto get individual test case results. - Compare failures, flaky tests, durations, and overall status.
- Inspect failing test cases with
tuist test case run show <id> --json. - 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> --jsonIf 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 5Pick 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:
| Metric | What to check |
status | Flag if base passed but head failed |
duration | Flag if head is >10% slower |
total_test_count | Note if test count changed (new or removed tests) |
failed_test_count | Compare failure counts |
flaky_test_count | Compare flaky counts |
avg_test_duration | Flag 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> --jsonMatch 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 100Match test cases by their name + module_name + suite_name across both runs.
Step 5: Classify Changes
Group test cases into categories:
- New failures: Tests that passed in base but failed in head.
- Fixed tests: Tests that failed in base but passed in head.
- Newly flaky: Tests not flaky in base but flaky in head.
- No longer flaky: Tests that were flaky in base but stable in head.
- New tests: Tests present in head but not in base.
- Removed tests: Tests present in base but not in head.
- 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> --jsonKey fields to examine:
failures[].message-- the assertion or error messagefailures[].path-- source file pathfailures[].line_number-- exact line of failurefailures[].issue_type-- type of issuerepetitions-- 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:
- Overall verdict: Better, worse, or neutral compared to base.
- New failures: List each with failure message, file path, and line number.
- New flaky tests: List with flakiness context.
- Fixed tests: List tests that are now passing.
- Duration: Overall and notable per-test regressions.
- 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 CacheTestsDone 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
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.

