Testing workflow
A curated collection of 115 skills, 16 agents, and 48 commands for Claude Code and Cursor.
npx -y skills add wpank/ai --skill testing-workflowAssembled 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.
- 11 stars11 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
Meta-skill that orchestrates comprehensive testing across a project by coordinating testing-patterns, e2e-testing, and testing agents. Use when setting up testing for a new project, improving coverage for an existing project, establishing a testing strategy, or verifying quality before a release.
SKILL.md
9.8 KB, ~2.2k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Testing Workflow
Orchestrate comprehensive testing across a project by coordinating the testing-patterns skill, e2e-testing skill, and testing agents. This meta-skill does not define test patterns itself — it routes to the right skill or agent at each stage and ensures nothing is missed.
Installation
OpenClaw / Moltbot / Clawbot
npx clawhub@latest install testing-workflow
When to Use
- Setting up testing for a new project from scratch
- Improving coverage for an existing project with gaps
- Establishing or revising a testing strategy
- Before a major release to verify quality gates are met
- After a large refactor to confirm nothing broke
- During code review when test adequacy is in question
- Onboarding a team to a testing workflow
Orchestration Flow
Follow these steps in order. Each step routes to a specific skill or agent — read and apply that resource before moving to the next step.
Phase 1: Discovery and Baseline
Scan the project to understand existing test infrastructure, measure current coverage, and identify gaps before making changes. Without a baseline, you cannot demonstrate improvement.
- Identify test infrastructure — Determine the test runner, assertion library, coverage tool, and CI configuration already in use. If none exist, flag that setup is needed.
- Measure current coverage — Run the existing test suite and record statement, branch, and function coverage. This is the baseline.
- Map untested code — Identify modules, functions, and code paths with no test coverage. Prioritize by risk: business-critical logic first, utilities last.
- Catalog existing tests — Categorize existing tests as unit, integration, or E2E. Check for skipped tests, flaky tests, and tests that don't assert anything meaningful.
Phase 2: Strategy Selection
Based on the discovery results, select the appropriate testing approach for this project.
- Determine project type — Use the Coverage Targets table below to set appropriate thresholds for the project type.
- Select test patterns — Read
ai/skills/testing/testing-patterns/SKILL.mdand choose the unit/integration test patterns that match the project's architecture, language, and framework. - Identify critical user journeys — List the 3-10 most important user workflows that require E2E coverage. These are flows where a failure would directly impact revenue, user trust, or safety.
- Document the strategy — Fill in the Testing Strategy Template (below) and commit it to the repository.
Phase 3: Implementation
Generate tests following the patterns selected in Phase 2.
- Unit tests first — Write unit tests for uncovered business logic, starting with the highest-risk modules. Follow the testing pyramid: ~70% of your tests should be unit tests.
- Integration tests next — Write integration tests for module boundaries, API endpoints, and database queries. Focus on the seams where components interact.
- E2E tests for critical journeys — Read
ai/skills/testing/e2e-testing/SKILL.mdand write E2E tests for each critical user journey identified in Phase 2. - Edge case coverage — After the happy paths are covered, add tests for error conditions, boundary values, null/empty inputs, and concurrency scenarios.
Phase 4: Validation
Verify that the new tests meet quality standards and coverage targets.
- Run the full test suite — Every test must pass. Fix failures before proceeding.
- Measure coverage against targets — Compare new coverage against the thresholds for the project type. If targets are not met, return to Phase 3.
- Check test quality — Review tests for the anti-patterns listed in testing-patterns (assert-free tests, overmocking, flaky tests, test pollution). Fix any found.
- Verify CI integration — Confirm that tests run automatically on every push/PR and that coverage thresholds are enforced in CI.
Phase 5: Maintenance
Establish ongoing practices to keep the test suite healthy.
- Set up coverage ratcheting — Configure CI to fail if coverage drops below the current level. Coverage should only go up.
- Establish flaky test policy — Any test that fails intermittently must be fixed within one sprint or removed with a justification.
- Define test review standards — Every PR that adds or changes logic must include corresponding test changes. Reviewers check for this.
- Schedule test health audits — Quarterly, review test execution time, flaky test rate, skipped test count, and coverage trends.
Skill Routing Table
Use this table to route specific needs to the correct resource:
| Need | Route To | Path |
|---|---|---|
| Unit/integration test patterns | testing-patterns | ai/skills/testing/testing-patterns/SKILL.md |
| E2E test patterns | e2e-testing | ai/skills/testing/e2e-testing/SKILL.md |
| Code quality standards | clean-code | ai/skills/testing/clean-code/SKILL.md |
| Review checklist | code-review | ai/skills/testing/code-review/SKILL.md |
| CI/CD quality gates | quality-gates | ai/skills/testing/quality-gates/SKILL.md |
| Debugging test failures | debugging | ai/skills/testing/debugging/SKILL.md |
When a request falls clearly into one row, go directly to that resource. Use the full orchestration flow only when comprehensive coverage is the goal.
Coverage Targets
Targets vary by project type. Use the appropriate row to set expectations:
| Project Type | Statement | Branch | Function | E2E Journeys | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Startup MVP | 60% | 50% | 60% | Top 3 flows | Focus on critical paths only |
| Production App | 80% | 70% | 80% | Top 10 flows | Balance speed with confidence |
| Library / Package | 90% | 85% | 95% | N/A | Public API must be fully covered |
| Critical Infrastructure | 95% | 90% | 95% | All flows | Zero tolerance for gaps |
These are minimums. Aim higher when time permits, but do not block releases on vanity metrics — prioritize meaningful coverage over percentage points.
Testing Strategy Template
Use this template to document the testing strategy for a project. Fill it in during the orchestration flow and keep it in the repo.
# Testing Strategy
## Project Overview
- **Project**: [name]
- **Type**: [startup MVP | production app | library | critical infrastructure]
- **Primary Language**: [language]
- **Framework**: [framework]
- **Test Runner**: [runner]
- **Coverage Tool**: [tool]
## Coverage Baseline
- **Statement**: [X%]
- **Branch**: [X%]
- **Function**: [X%]
- **E2E Journeys Covered**: [N of M]
- **Date Measured**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
## Coverage Targets
- **Statement**: [target%]
- **Branch**: [target%]
- **Function**: [target%]
- **E2E Journeys**: [target count]
## Test Patterns Selected
- [ ] [Pattern 1 — reason for selection]
- [ ] [Pattern 2 — reason for selection]
- [ ] [Pattern 3 — reason for selection]
## Critical User Journeys (E2E)
1. [Journey 1 — e.g., signup -> onboarding -> first action]
2. [Journey 2 — e.g., login -> dashboard -> export]
3. [Journey 3 — e.g., checkout -> payment -> confirmation]
## Gaps and Risks
- [Untested area 1 — risk level, mitigation plan]
- [Untested area 2 — risk level, mitigation plan]
## Quality Gate Status
- [ ] All tests pass
- [ ] Coverage targets met
- [ ] Critical journeys covered with E2E
- [ ] No skipped tests without justification
- [ ] Test execution time within budget
- [ ] CI enforces coverage thresholds
Quality Gates for Testing Completion
All of the following must be satisfied before marking testing complete:
| Gate | Requirement | Why |
|---|---|---|
| All tests pass | Zero failures, zero errors | Flaky tests count as failures |
| Coverage targets met | Statement, branch, and function coverage meet project-type thresholds | Untested code is unverified code |
| Critical journeys covered | Every critical user journey has a passing E2E test | Revenue and trust depend on these flows |
| No unjustified skips | Every skip, xit, or xdescribe has a comment and linked issue | Skipped tests rot into permanent gaps |
| Execution time budget | Unit < 60s, E2E < 10min | Slow suites get skipped by developers |
| No test pollution | Running any test file alone produces same results as full suite | Shared state masks failures |
| Mocks are justified | Every mock has a comment explaining why the real impl cannot be used | Over-mocking hides real bugs |
NEVER Do
- NEVER write tests that test implementation details instead of behavior — tests must verify what the code does, not how it does it
- NEVER skip the discovery phase — always measure the baseline before writing new tests, or you cannot demonstrate improvement
- NEVER merge tests that depend on execution order — each test must be independent and idempotent
- NEVER mock what you do not own — wrap third-party dependencies in your own adapters and mock the adapters instead
- NEVER treat coverage percentage as the sole quality metric — 100% coverage with weak assertions is worse than 70% coverage with strong assertions
- NEVER leave the test suite in a failing state — if a test fails, fix it or remove it with a justification before moving on
- NEVER skip E2E tests for critical user journeys — unit tests alone cannot catch integration failures in flows that matter most
- NEVER deploy without running the full test suite — partial test runs create false confidence
What ships with it: 1 file
2.6 KB alongside SKILL.md
- README.md2.6 KB
Gives 1 of the 12 instructions most test skills give in ~2.2k tokens
Counted across 964 of the 1,571 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07
- Close the browser when donein 55 of 964, across 12 files
- Wait for network idle statein 51 of 964, across 6 files
- Launch Chromium in headless modein 49 of 964, across 6 files
- Use descriptive selectors for elementsin 49 of 964, across 6 files
- Run provided scripts with help flag firstin 49 of 964, across 6 files
- Add appropriate explicit waitsin 48 of 964, across 5 files
- Use bundled scripts as black boxesin 46 of 964, across 3 files
- Do not read script source codein 46 of 964, across 3 files
- Use sync playwright for scriptsin 46 of 964, across 3 files
- Inspect dom before executing actionsin 46 of 964, across 3 files
- Run the full test suitehere, and in 37 of 964
- Write the failing test firstin 29 of 964, across 23 files
Said here and by no other author read
- prioritize untested code by risk level
- write integration tests for module boundaries next
- measure new coverage against project type thresholds
- configure CI to fail if coverage drops
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.