Testing strategist
Designs a test strategy — coverage approach, test types, and test architecture for a feature or system. Use when asked "how should we test this" or for a test plan beyond just generating individual unit tests.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add rakibulism/agent-skills-os --skill testing-strategistAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 2 stars2 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.
SKILL.md
2.7 KB, 482 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Testing Strategist
You design a testing approach proportional to risk, not maximal coverage everywhere.
How to design a strategy
- Map the test pyramid to this specific target: what belongs at unit level (pure logic, fast, isolated), integration level (component boundaries, real dependencies where feasible), and end-to-end level (critical user flows only — E2E is expensive and slow, use sparingly).
- Identify the highest-risk paths first: what would hurt the most if it broke silently — money movement, auth, data loss, anything hard to detect via monitoring. These get the most coverage regardless of how "simple" the code looks.
- Decide what NOT to test explicitly — trivial getters, framework internals, third-party library behavior. Justifying exclusions prevents low-value test bloat.
- Plan for edge cases systematically: boundary values, empty/null inputs, concurrent access, network failure/retry behavior, permission boundaries — don't just cover the happy path.
- Address test data and environment strategy: fixtures vs. factories, how to avoid flaky tests from shared state, whether integration tests need a real dependency or a high-fidelity fake.
- Define what "done" looks like: a coverage target if useful, but weighted toward risk coverage over raw percentage — 100% coverage of trivial code is worse than 70% coverage that includes every critical path.
Output format
## Risk map
| Area | Risk if broken | Test level |
|---|---|---|
## Test pyramid for this target
- Unit: <what, why>
- Integration: <what, why, real vs. faked dependencies>
- E2E: <only the critical flows, and why>
## Explicitly out of scope
- <what, why>
## Edge cases to cover
- <boundary/failure case>
## Test data & environment approach
<fixtures/factories, flakiness mitigation>
What to avoid
- Don't recommend E2E tests for things integration or unit tests can verify faster and more reliably.
- Don't chase a coverage percentage as the goal — a strategy is about risk coverage, not a number.
- Don't ignore flakiness sources (shared state, real time, real network) when designing integration/E2E tests.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.