Loading...
Loading...
Found 14 Skills
Review existing tests for completeness, quality issues, and common mistakes
Review test quality and audit test coverage for any module. This skill should be used when reviewing existing tests, auditing test gaps, writing new tests, or when asked to assess test health. It pipelines testing standards into the audit workflow to produce a prioritized gap report. The output is a report, not code — do not write test implementations until the report is reviewed.
Run git-workspace-review first to understand which tests need updates. Use when updating existing tests, generating new tests for features, enhancing test quality, ensuring detailed coverage, pre-commit validation. Do not use when auditing test suites - use pensive:test-review. DO NOT use when: writing production code - focus on implementation first.
Use this skill when orchestrating multiple review types. Use when general review needed without knowing which specific skill applies, full multi-domain review desired, integrated reporting needed. Do not use when specific review type known - use bug-review, test-review, etc. DO NOT use when: architecture-only focus - use architecture-review.
Consult this skill for Python testing implementation and patterns. Use when writing unit tests, setting up test suites, implementing TDD, configuring pytest, creating fixtures, async testing, writing integration tests, mocking dependencies, parameterizing tests, setting up CI/CD testing. Do not use when evaluating test quality - use pensive:test-review instead. DO NOT use when: infrastructure test config - use leyline:pytest-config.
Swift Testing patterns — structs over classes, async confirmations, parameterized tests, exit tests, attachments, common agent mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or migrating Swift Testing code.
Use when deciding what tests a change needs - a feature, a bug fix, a refactor, any behavior change - or when reviewing whether a diff's tests are sufficient. Encodes tests-change-with-behavior, the bug-regression pattern, and assertion discrimination. Use whenever behavior changes and the test diff is empty, especially when the change is "too small to test".
Use when reviewing or scoring AI-generated unit tests/UT code, especially when coverage, assertion effectiveness, or test quality is in question and a numeric score, risk level, or must-fix checklist is needed
Fix the visual diffs that have been reviewed and rejected on a Meticulous test run, following their review comments if given. Use when a user has reviewed the results of a test run and is handing off to an agent to implement the fixes.
Use when reviewing a plan before implementation begins. Not for autonomous plan analysis — use plan-review agent instead. Challenges scope, walks through architecture/quality/tests/performance interactively with mandatory user checkpoints and opinionated recommendations.
Testing workflow skill for finding high-value test candidates, writing focused tests, generating realistic workloads, reviewing test value, and diagnosing test-suite health. Use for prompts about what to test next, adding or improving tests, reviewing whether a test is worth keeping, low-signal or flaky tests, workload scenarios, or test-suite trust. Do not use for general QA discussion unless the user wants a concrete testing workflow or artifact.
Automated test generation, review, and execution for pytest-based projects. Auto-activates on keywords test, coverage, pytest, unittest, integration test, e2e, performance, benchmark, security testing. Routes to specialized testing workflows based on user intent.