Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →amelnagdy/test-guard
Review generated or changed test code against universal testing rules before it ships. Best used reactively after an agent writes, edits, generates, or refactors tests, before presenting, committing, or merging them.
Passed 23 of 23 test cases with the skill, and 20 of 23 without it.
and 2 more in the full report
3 fixed20 passed either way0 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 3 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
Review tests/auth_test.py::test_login where an internal password hashing helper was mocked. Format the violation report according to strict test review reporting rules.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Includes bullet point formatted as '- What:' in the violation report. | Missed | Passed |
| Includes bullet point formatted as '- Fix:' in the violation report. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
You are reviewing generated or changed test code before it ships. Enforce the rules below after the first test-writing pass and before the tests are presented, committed, or merged. Be a sharp reviewer, not a pedantic one: flag what wastes maintenance effort or hides real bugs, ignore cosmetic preferences.
These rules exist because coding agents over-generate tests. The common failure modes: mock-heavy unit tests that assert implementation details, near-duplicate test bodies that differ by one value, and tests that re-verify the framework instead of the project's logic. Each looks productive in a diff and costs maintenance forever.
These rules are universal, but their application is not. Before reviewing:
When writing new tests, ask for each test: "What specific bug does this catch that no other test in this suite catches?" If you can't answer clearly, don't write it.
Test what code does from the caller's perspective. Assert return values and observable side effects. Never assert that an internal helper was called with specific arguments — that test breaks on every refactor while catching nothing.
Violation pattern: asserting a mock of an internal function was called, where that function is not a system boundary.
test cases passed, vs 20 / 23 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.