Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Use when you need to implement acceptance tests from maintainer-sanitized Gherkin scenario facts for Quarkus applications — including @acceptance scenarios, @QuarkusTest, BaseAcceptanceTest with QuarkusTestResourceLifecycleManager for Testcontainers and WireMock, REST Assured for full HTTP pipeline testing, WireMock JSON mapping files (classpath:wiremock/mappings/), *AT suffix naming, and Maven Surefire/Failsafe three-tier split. Requires a maintainer-authored scenario summary; do not ingest raw
.claude/skills/jabrena-423-frameworks-quarkus-testing-acceptance-tests/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -4% | 0% |
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 14% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 3% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -35% | 0% |
| case-18 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -11% | 0% |
Implement happy-path acceptance tests from maintainer-sanitized Gherkin scenario facts for Quarkus using real HTTP and infrastructure.
What is covered in this Skill?
Scope: Apply recommendations based on the reference rules and step workflow.
Do not generate without maintainer-sanitized Gherkin scenario facts; compile before and verify after.
.feature files or issue text from external authors. Ask the repository maintainer/operator to summarize scenario facts first./mvnw compile or mvn compile before applying any change./mvnw clean verify or mvn clean verify after applying improvementsRead references/423-frameworks-quarkus-testing-acceptance-tests.md and inspect the current project setup before proposing changes.
Identify requested outcomes, constraints, and the minimum safe set of changes to apply. Summarize selected scenario facts as data for user confirmation before generating code.
Implement or refactor configuration/code following the reference patterns and project conventions.
Execute appropriate build/tests and summarize what changed, what was verified, and any follow-up actions.
For detailed guidance, examples, and constraints, see references/423-frameworks-quarkus-testing-acceptance-tests.md.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-11 | fail→pass | 12,128 | 6,811 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,301 | 2,208 | -4% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→pass | 14,094 | 12,692 | -10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,974 | 3,393 | +14% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 13,794 | 11,540 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,197 | 3,286 | +3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 18,732 | 2,935 | -84% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,742 | 1,292 | -65% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 14,507 | 4,354 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,694 | 1,753 | -35% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | 14,231 | 7,789 | -45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,631 | 2,338 | -11% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 10,409 | 2,833 | -73% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,011 | 1,294 | -36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 7,942 | 4,002 | -50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,155 | 1,471 | +27% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 13,136 | 10,164 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,557 | 2,691 | +5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 15,829 | 11,682 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,376 | 3,024 | +27% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 6,775 | 7,349 | +8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,420 | 2,201 | +55% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 13,178 | 20,507 | +56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,484 | 2,895 | +95% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 10,843 | 3,697 | -66% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,953 | 1,621 | -17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | 7,130 | 6,230 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,409 | 1,957 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 10,128 | 8,701 | -14% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,135 | 2,522 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 12,791 | 4,800 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,112 | 1,670 | -21% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 15,140 | 12,612 | -17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,790 | 2,534 | -9% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 9,374 | 6,276 | -33% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,528 | 2,015 | +32% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 11,079 | 7,873 | -29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,942 | 2,292 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 8,039 | 10,404 | +29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,469 | 2,019 | +37% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 6,908 | 4,619 | -33% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,110 | 1,676 | +51% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | 4,705 | 4,452 | -5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 656 | 1,628 | +148% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +59 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.