boshu2/agentops/skills/test/SKILL.md
test
Generate tests and coverage plans. Triggers: "test", "generate tests and coverage plans.", "test skill".
- Source repository stars
- 429
- Declared platforms
- 0
- Static risk flags
- 1
- Last source update
- 2026-08-28
- Source checked
- 2026-08-28
Decision brief
What it does: where it fits
Generate real tests, run them, and leave reproducible coverage or TDD evidence. Do not stop at a plan unless the requested mode is strategy.
Not for
- Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
- Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.
Compatibility matrix
Platform support, with evidence labels
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
Inspect first. Install second.
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/boshu2/agentops --skill "skills/test"Inspect the Agent Skill "test" from https://github.com/boshu2/agentops/blob/cf7c5914011e51509992d5fa7a83a8ed13ae8f6b/skills/test/SKILL.md at commit cf7c5914011e51509992d5fa7a83a8ed13ae8f6b. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
What the source asks the agent to do
- 01
Workflow
When the caller supplies a .feature file with scenarios, work forward from each Given/When/Then. Name one covering test after the behavior, and add @covered-by:[::] above the scenario. Prove the mapping by running the coverage checker against that caller-supplied feature (not th…
API, CLI, schema, or compatibility contracts: conformance-harnesses.mdParsers, serializers, or hostile input: fuzzing.mdGenerated output or snapshots: golden-artifacts.md - 02
Critical Constraints
Why: behavior is the contract. Derive tests from acceptance scenarios and
Why: behavior is the contract. Derive tests from acceptance scenarios andWhy: prove new behavior. In TDD mode record a real failing test before theWhy: avoid false confidence. Assert exact values, error types/messages, - 03
Modes
Default to generate. Flags: --mode, --scope, --min-coverage, and --dry-run narrow the workflow but never weaken its evidence requirements.
Default to generate. Flags: --mode, --scope, --min-coverage, and --dry-run narrow the workflow but never weaken its evidence requirements. - 04
Oracle-strength hierarchy
Every test asserts through an oracle, and oracles are not equal. Rank them:
Every test asserts through an oracle, and oracles are not equal. Rank them:Choose the strongest oracle the behavior admits and name the oracle-strength tier when a test uses anything below exact. A smoke assertion where an exact one was available is the oracle downgrade failure mode: the test… - 05
Mutation-kill proof
A new test earns trust by failing when the behavior it guards is broken. In tdd mode the recorded RED run is that proof. In other mutating modes, prove at least one kill per new behavioral test: mutate the covered logic (flip the branch, break the boundary value, or use the proj…
A new test earns trust by failing when the behavior it guards is broken. In tdd mode the recorded RED run is that proof. In other mutating modes, prove at least one kill per new behavioral test: mutate the covered logic…
Permission review
Static risk signals and limitations
Runs scripts
The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
bash scripts/check-scenario-coverage.sh <path-to-caller-feature> --runRuns scripts
The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
Re-run the baseline coverage command. Summarize before/after coverage, testsEvidence record
Why each signal appears
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 94/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 429 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
Provenance and original SKILL.md
- Repository
- boshu2/agentops
- Skill path
- skills/test/SKILL.md
- Commit
- cf7c5914011e51509992d5fa7a83a8ed13ae8f6b
- License
- Apache-2.0
- Collected
- 2026-08-28
- Default branch
- main
View the original SKILL.md
Test Skill
Generate real tests, run them, and leave reproducible coverage or TDD evidence.
Do not stop at a plan unless the requested mode is strategy.
Critical Constraints
- Why: behavior is the contract. Derive tests from acceptance scenarios and public behavior, not implementation details or coverage percentages alone.
- Why: prove new behavior. In TDD mode record a real failing test before the minimal implementation; a test that starts green is not RED evidence.
- Why: avoid false confidence. Assert exact values, error types/messages, and branch outcomes; ban zero-assertion, tautological, and padding tests.
- Why: keep suites trustworthy. Tests must be deterministic, isolated, and independent of timing, ordering, production services, or mutable shared state.
- Why: protect user intent. Report a product bug discovered by a test; do not silently change product behavior or delete existing tests without approval.
- Why: close with proof. Run the narrow test after each edit, then the relevant suite and coverage command before handing work downstream.
Modes
| Mode | Use when | Required result |
|---|---|---|
generate | writing tests for existing code | passing focused and suite tests |
coverage | finding and filling important gaps | before/after coverage plus tests |
tdd | implementing new behavior test-first | logged RED → green → refactor cycles |
strategy | designing test architecture only | inventory, risks, and recommendations |
Default to generate. Flags: --mode, --scope, --min-coverage, and
--dry-run narrow the workflow but never weaken its evidence requirements.
Oracle-strength hierarchy
Every test asserts through an oracle, and oracles are not equal. Rank them:
exact value > property/invariant > differential (two implementations agree) > smoke (it ran)
Choose the strongest oracle the behavior admits and name the oracle-strength
tier when a test uses anything below exact. A smoke assertion where an exact one was available
is the oracle downgrade failure mode: the test runs the code but proves
almost nothing about it. Stop condition: no acceptance scenario may be covered
only by smoke-tier tests when a stronger oracle is practical; if only smoke is
practical (e.g. nondeterministic external output), record why in
.agents/scratch/tests/summary.md so the gap is a visible decision, not an accident.
Mutation-kill proof
A new test earns trust by failing when the behavior it guards is broken. In
tdd mode the recorded RED run is that proof. In other mutating modes, prove
at least one kill per new behavioral test: mutate the covered logic (flip the
branch, break the boundary value, or use the project's mutation tool), confirm
the test fails, then restore. A test that stays green through its own mutation
is the immortal test failure mode — delete or strengthen it before handoff;
never count it as coverage.
Harness health floors
Green is only evidence when the harness can go red. Before trusting or reporting a green suite, confirm these floors:
- The suite runs to completion — a crashed or truncated run is not a pass.
- Zero-assertion test count did not grow with this change.
- Skipped or excluded tests did not silently increase; new skips are named in the summary with a reason.
- At least one deliberate failure (the mutation-kill or RED run above) failed through the same runner and reporting path you are about to trust.
A suite that cannot demonstrate a failure is the dead harness failure mode: its green is decoration. Report a dead harness as a finding; do not build coverage claims on top of it.
Workflow
1. Bind tests to behavior
When the caller supplies a .feature file with scenarios, work forward from
each Given/When/Then. Name one covering test after the behavior, and add
@covered-by:<test-path>[::<TestName>] above the scenario. Prove the mapping by
running the coverage checker against that caller-supplied feature (not this
skill's own spec):
bash scripts/check-scenario-coverage.sh <path-to-caller-feature> --run
Without scenarios, inventory public behavior, error paths, branches, and edge cases. Rank gaps by risk: high complexity plus low coverage first.
2. Detect the language and baseline
Stop at the first applicable project marker and consult the Standards skill for it:
| Marker | Framework | Baseline command |
|---|---|---|
go.mod | Go test | go test -coverprofile=coverage.out ./... |
pyproject.toml, setup.py | pytest | pytest --cov --cov-report=term-missing |
package.json | Jest/Vitest | npx jest --coverage or npx vitest run --coverage |
Cargo.toml | cargo test | cargo tarpaulin --out Lcov |
Write raw coverage to .agents/scratch/tests/coverage-raw.txt, a ranked gap inventory
to .agents/scratch/tests/gaps.md, and language-native machine output where available.
3. Write the smallest valuable tests
Read the target function and its callers before writing tests. Cover every branch and error return with exact expected results. Use descriptive test names and one behavioral focus per table row or parameter set.
Load specialized guidance only when its trigger applies:
- API, CLI, schema, or compatibility contracts: conformance-harnesses.md
- Parsers, serializers, or hostile input: fuzzing.md
- Generated output or snapshots: golden-artifacts.md
- Invariant-heavy behavior: metamorphic-testing.md
- Real databases, queues, APIs, or services: real-service-e2e.md
For golden updates, follow golden-artifact-strategy.md and review the artifact diff; regeneration alone is not acceptance.
4. Run RED, green, and refactor checks
In tdd mode:
- Write one behavioral test and run it; require a relevant failure.
- Implement only enough to pass that test.
- Refactor under green without changing the test contract.
- Run the focused test and the relevant suite after each cycle.
- Append the exact commands and outcomes to
.agents/scratch/tests/tdd-log.md.
In other mutating modes, run each new test immediately, then the owning package or module, then the relevant project suite. A failure caused by a wrong test is fixed in the test; a product defect is reported explicitly rather than masked.
Checkpoint: before coverage measurement, confirm the focused test and the relevant suite are green and the recorded RED evidence names the intended behavior.
5. Measure and hand off
Re-run the baseline coverage command. Summarize before/after coverage, tests
added, remaining high-risk gaps, bugs found, and exact validation commands in
.agents/scratch/tests/summary.md. Supply that evidence to Validate when the test
change accompanies a product slice or is ready for acceptance.
Language Rules
- Go: use
<source>_test.go,Test<Uppercase>, table-driven cases, and exact output assertions; nevercov*_test.goor*_extra_test.go. - Python: use pytest fixtures and parametrization; type test helpers.
- JS/TS: group
describe/itby public behavior and mock external services, not internal implementation. - Rust: prefer focused unit tests plus integration tests at public boundaries; keep fixtures deterministic.
Strategy Mode
Inventory test files, functions, assertion density, unit/integration/e2e split,
fixtures, and CI wiring. Write .agents/scratch/tests/strategy.md with prioritized
structural gaps and a test architecture; do not generate code in this mode.
Output Specification
- Artifact directory:
.agents/scratch/tests/plus test files in the target's language-native locations. - Filename convention:
coverage-raw.txt,coverage-func.txtorcoverage.json,gaps.md,summary.md,tdd-log.md, andstrategy.md. - Serialization/schema format: Markdown evidence reports, native coverage text/profile formats, and JSON where the coverage tool supports it.
- Validator command: run the focused test, relevant suite, coverage command,
and
bash scripts/check-scenario-coverage.sh ... --runwhen scenarios exist. - Downstream use: factual evidence that a caller may supply to Validate.
Quality Rubric
- Every acceptance scenario maps to a passing behavioral test.
- New behavior has authentic RED evidence before implementation.
- Assertions are exact and cover happy, edge, and error paths.
- Tests are deterministic, isolated, fast at the unit layer, and maintainable.
- Coverage changes prioritize risk and never substitute for behavioral proof.
- Artifacts name the commands, results, remaining gaps, and discovered defects.
Examples
Generate mode: inspect a parser, baseline coverage, add table-driven happy, malformed, and empty-input cases, run focused plus package tests, then record the coverage delta and remaining gaps.
TDD mode: write TestParseConfig_MissingName, capture its failing output,
add the minimum validation, rerun green, refactor, run the full package, and log
the cycle in tdd-log.md.
Troubleshooting
| Problem | Response |
|---|---|
| new test starts green | strengthen it until it proves the missing behavior |
| flaky timing/network test | inject deterministic clocks/data and fake the external boundary |
| coverage rises but risk remains | add behavior and error-path assertions, not padding |
| golden update is large | inspect the diff and split intentional from accidental change |
| product bug discovered | preserve the reproducer, report the bug, and do not mask it |
References
- test.feature — executable behavior contract
- conformance-harnesses.md
- fuzzing.md
- golden-artifacts.md
- golden-artifact-strategy.md
- metamorphic-testing.md
- real-service-e2e.md
Frequently asked questions
What to verify before installation and use
What does the test source document cover?
Generate real tests, run them, and leave reproducible coverage or TDD evidence. Do not stop at a plan unless the requested mode is strategy.
How do I install test?
The source record exposes this install command: npx skills add https://github.com/boshu2/agentops --skill "skills/test". Inspect the command and pinned source before running it.
Which permission-related actions were detected?
Static rules flagged exec-script in the source; the page lists the matching lines and excerpts.
Alternatives
Compare before choosing
alirezarezvani/claude-skills
app-store-optimization
App Store Optimization (ASO) toolkit for researching keywords, analyzing competitor rankings, generating metadata suggestions, and improving app visibility on Apple App Store and Google Play Store. Use when the user asks about ASO, app store rankings, app metadata, app titles and descriptions, app store listings, app visibility, or mobile app marketing on iOS or Android. Supports keyword research and scoring, competitor keyword analysis, metadata optimization, A/B test planning, launch checklist
dotnet/skills
migrate-static-to-wrapper
Migrate C# static calls to a wrapper or built-in abstraction the user already named, within named files/projects, including affected fake-based test updates. USE FOR explicit DateTime.UtcNow/Now to TimeProvider, File.* to IFileSystem, existing IEnvironmentReader/ITextFileStore, scoped migrations, constructor injection, or a static API seam that keeps callers compiling and DateTimeKind unchanged. DO NOT USE when the user asks for behavior tests but leaves seam selection open (testability-obstacle
dotnet/skills
test-tagging
Classifies existing tests by standard traits and reports their distribution. MUST USE to categorize/tag/label tests, compare happy vs error paths, audit the test mix, or describe coverage shape by test type. Read bodies when names mislead. Apply canonical attributes; otherwise report only. DO NOT USE for test-quality audits, executed coverage or CRAP, behavioral gaps, writing tests, or migration.
yonatangross/orchestkit
verify
Grade work that already exists and decide whether it can merge. Runs the project's current unit, integration, and E2E suites plus security scanning and type checking, scores every dimension 0-10, and returns a merge verdict with a VERIFIED-vs-CLAIMED evidence manifest. Writes no test files and edits no source. Use when verifying changes are ready to merge. Use /ork:cover instead when the tests still have to be written.