Plan test coverage

Skill kensaurus/cursor-kenji/skills/plan-test-coverage

🦖Curated Cursor AI agent skills, slash commands, MCP configs, subagents & rules for full-stack dev — React 19, Next.js 15, Supabase, Tailwind v4, TypeScript

Install

npx -y skills add kensaurus/cursor-kenji --skill plan-test-coverage

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

6 stars6 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

User-story-driven test coverage audit and plan — no test writing in this pass. Derives stories from real code, builds story-to-test traceability matrix, detects fake-green and weak tests, multi-lens coverage (branch/path/risk/integration/mutation). Coverage numbers from real runs or [NEEDS RUN]. Natural lock-in after stub-wiring. Use when asked to "test coverage plan", "coverage audit", "traceability matrix", "fake-green tests", "uncovered user stories", "plan tests for critical flows", "mutation testing plan", or "what's not tested".

The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.

SKILL.md

3.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Test Coverage Audit + Plan (User-Story-Driven)

Role: Senior QA / test engineer.

Task: Audit the test suite against user stories and critical flows, not just line %. Find untested, weakly tested, and fake-green tests. Build traceability matrix + burndown. Audit & plan only — do not write tests in this pass.

This skill vs neighbors

Skill	Does
plan-test-coverage (this)	Story-driven coverage plan
`test-unit`	Write unit/integration tests (execution)
`test-qa`	Live QA crawl
`test-playwright`	E2E verification after changes
`workflow-spec-tdd`	Spec + TDD during feature build
`plan-stub-checker`	Finds unwired UI — feed into critical-path tests here

Loop position: plan-stub-checker → wiring approval → plan-test-coverage → plan-perf-audit / plan-security-audit → plan-docs-sync

⛔ Preservation Contract

Read references/preservation-contract.md. Acknowledge in output #1.

References

File	Contents
`references/methodology.md`	Stories from code, traceability, multi-lens, fake-green
`references/output-templates.md`	Matrix, burndown, phased plan

Phase flow

0. Derive user stories from code (FIRST)
1. Inventory existing tests + coverage baseline
2. Traceability matrix (story ↔ test)
3. Multi-lens coverage audit
4. Fake-green / weak-test detection
5. Burndown + phased coverage plan
6. Guardrails (mutation CI, coverage ratchet)
7. Research citations

Detail: references/methodology.md

Phase 0 — Stories from code (before judging coverage)

Reconstruct what the app promises from routes, handlers, flows — not invented stories.

Each story: acceptance criteria + criticality + cited implementing code.

Phase 1 — Test inventory

Discover test files; map to stories. Run coverage tool if available:

npm test -- --coverage
npx vitest run --coverage

Not run → [NEEDS RUN] with command to run.

Phase 2 — Traceability matrix

Core artifact. Every critical story with no test = top-priority gap.

Template: references/output-templates.md

Phase 3–4 — Depth + fake-green

Judge branch/path/risk/integration/error paths — not just line %.

Flag fake-green: over-mocks, expect(true), implementation-detail tests.

Recommend mutation testing on critical modules for blind spots.

Burndown + plan

Phases:

Critical uncovered + fake-green (especially newly wired stubs from stub-checker)
Error/edge + integration boundaries
Important stories
Minor branches

Per gap: given/when/then spec + "what must keep working". Plan only.

Required output (in order)

Preservation-contract acknowledgment
Derived user stories + AC + criticality (cited)
Existing-test inventory + baseline or [NEEDS RUN]
Traceability matrix
Multi-lens coverage audit
Fake-green / weak-test findings
Burndown table
Coverage + enhancement plan, phased
Guardrails/tooling
Research notes + citations
Open questions / [NEEDS PRODUCT INPUT] / [NEEDS RUN]

Rules

Plan only — do not write tests until approved.
User stories first, from real code.
Coverage ≠ single %. Judge depth + mutation honesty.
Never fabricate stories, tests, or numbers.
Separate true gap vs test-quality issue.