Tdd
Collection of agent skills I use in day to day work spanning engineering and none engineering work.
npx -y skills add endalk200/skills --skill tddAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration tests.
SKILL.md
3.3 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Test-Driven Development
TDD is the red → green → refactor loop. This skill is the reference that makes that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, the anti-patterns, and the rules of the loop. Every section applies on every cycle — consult them before and during the loop, not after.
When exploring the codebase, read CONTEXT.md (if it exists) so test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
What a good test is
Tests verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't. A good test reads like a specification — "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists — and survives refactors because it doesn't care about internal structure.
See tests.md for examples and mocking.md for mocking guidelines.
Seams — where tests go
A seam is the place where the tested module presents its interface: where you observe behavior without reaching inside. Tests live at seams, never against internals.
Before writing a test, identify the seam under test. If an existing public interface is the obvious seam, state it and proceed. If the seam is new or ambiguous, confirm it with the user first. You can't test everything — choosing seams deliberately is how testing effort lands on the critical paths and complex logic instead of every edge case.
Ask: "What's the public interface, and which seams should we test?"
Anti-patterns
- Implementation-coupled — mocks internal collaborators, tests private methods, or verifies through a side channel (querying the database instead of using the interface). The tell: the test breaks when you refactor but behavior hasn't changed.
- Tautological — the assertion recomputes the expected value the way the code does (
expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b), a snapshot derived by hand the same way, a constant asserted equal to itself), so it passes by construction and can never disagree with the code. Expected values must come from an independent source of truth — a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec. - Horizontal slicing — writing all tests first, then all implementation. Bulk tests verify imagined behavior: you test the shape of things rather than user-facing behavior, the tests go insensitive to real changes, and you commit to test structure before understanding the implementation. Work in vertical slices instead — one test → one implementation → repeat, each test a tracer bullet that responds to what the last cycle taught you.
Rules of the loop
- Red before green. Write the failing test first, then only enough code to pass it. Don't anticipate future tests or add speculative features.
- One slice at a time. One seam, one test, one minimal implementation per cycle.
- Refactor after green. Improve names and structure while keeping behavior unchanged and the tests passing. Do not add new behavior during refactoring; broader architectural changes belong in the review stage (see the
code-reviewskill).