Test driven development
(TDD) Use when implementing any feature or bugfix. Apply the Logic Gate to identify what needs tests, then use the Iron Rule for strict test-first development on logic.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add MiguelAguiarDEV/skills --skill test-driven-developmentAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 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 file declares
Copied from the file, not written here
The file declares its own license as MIT (ported from ravila4/claude-adhd-skills, see ../../NOTICE.md). 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
4.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Test-Driven Development (TDD)
The Two Gates
Before writing any code, pass it through two gates:
- The Logic Gate — Triage. Does this piece contain logic?
- The Iron Rule — For everything that passes the Logic Gate, strict TDD applies.
flowchart TD
A[New code to write] --> B[Decompose into pieces]
B --> C{{"Logic Gate: Does this piece contain logic?"}}
C -->|"Conditionals, transformations, validation, state changes, error handling"| D["Iron Rule: TDD"]
C -->|"Dataclasses, config, thin wrappers, type aliases, formatting"| E[Write directly]
D --> F["RED: Write failing test"]
F --> G["GREEN: Minimal implementation"]
G --> H["REFACTOR: Clean up"]
H --> I{More pieces?}
E --> I
I -->|Yes| C
I -->|No| J[Done]
Gate 1: The Logic Gate
Decompose the work into its constituent pieces. For each piece, ask: does this contain logic?
Passes the Logic Gate (requires TDD):
- Conditionals and branching
- Data transformations and computations
- Validation and parsing
- State management and transitions
- Error handling with recovery logic
- Business rules and domain logic
- Algorithm implementations
Does NOT pass the Logic Gate (write directly):
- Dataclasses, NamedTuples, TypedDicts (pure data declarations)
- Type aliases and protocol definitions
- Configuration and constants
- Thin wrappers that only delegate (no branching, no transformation)
- Plot formatting and visual styling
- Boilerplate (
__init__.py, module-level setup) - String templates and static content
When in doubt: If you can't point to a conditional, transformation, or state change, it probably doesn't pass the Logic Gate.
Triage Output
Before writing code, briefly identify what passes and what doesn't:
- "These pieces contain logic and need TDD: X, Y"
- "These are declarations/glue and can be written directly: Z"
Gate 2: The Iron Rule
For code that passes the Logic Gate: never write logic without a preceding failing test.
If logic is written before its test:
- Stop — the test you write now can only describe what you already wrote, not verify intended behavior
- Delete the logic and restart test-first
- This applies to logic specifically, not declarations
Red-Green-Refactor Cycle
RED: Write a Failing Test
Write a single minimal test demonstrating intended behavior:
- Clear, descriptive name
- Test actual functionality (not mocks unless necessary)
- Focus on one behavior
- If test name contains "and", split into separate tests
Verify RED: Confirm Failure
Run tests and confirm:
- Test fails for the expected reason (missing feature)
- Not failing due to syntax errors
- This verification is non-negotiable
GREEN: Minimal Implementation
Write the simplest possible code satisfying the test:
- Avoid feature creep
- Don't refactor unrelated code
- Don't over-engineer
Verify GREEN: Confirm Pass
Confirm:
- The new test passes
- No existing tests break
REFACTOR: Clean Up
Improve code quality while maintaining green status:
- Eliminate duplication
- Improve naming
- Simplify logic
- Run tests after each change
Quality Test Attributes
Minimal: Single responsibility per test Clear: Descriptive name revealing behavior Realistic: Demonstrate intended API usage Focused: One assertion per test (generally)
Common Rationalizations to Reject
"I'll test afterward"
- Tests written post-implementation pass immediately
- Proves nothing about validation capability
"Manual testing covered edge cases"
- Lacks systematic documentation
- Not reproducible
"Tests-after achieve identical goals"
- Tests-first answer: "What should happen?"
- Tests-after answer: "What does this do?"
- Fundamentally different approaches
Verification Checklist
Before considering work complete:
- Logic Gate triage was performed
- Every piece containing logic has corresponding tests
- Each test for logic failed before implementation
- Failures occurred for expected reasons
- Code written is minimal
- All tests pass without errors or warnings
- Real code tested (mocks only when necessary)
- Edge cases and error conditions covered for logic
Debugging Integration
Bug found? Write failing test reproducing it. Follow TDD cycle. Test proves fix and prevents regression.
Never fix bugs without a test.