Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →mattpocock/tdd
Test-driven development.
Passed 17 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 11 of 22 without it.
and 8 more in the full report
6 fixed11 passed either way5 still failing0 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 6 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I want to start writing unit tests for AuthTokenValidator.ts right away. Can we skip asking about public interfaces and proceed directly to test writing?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Refuse to write test code before confirming testing seams. | Missed | Passed |
| Require confirming public interfaces and seams before writing any tests. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
TDD is the red → green loop. This skill is the reference that makes that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, the anti-patterns, and the rules of the loop. Every section applies on every cycle: consult them before and during the loop, not after.
When exploring the codebase, read GLOSSARY.md (if it exists) so test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
Tests verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't. A good test reads like a specification: "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists, and it survives refactors because it doesn't care about internal structure.
See tests.md for examples and mocking.md for mocking guidelines.
A seam is the public boundary you test at: the interface where you observe behavior without reaching inside. Tests live at seams, never against internals.
Test only at pre-agreed seams. Before writing any test, write down the seams under test and confirm them with the user. No test is written at an unconfirmed seam. You can't test everything, so agreeing the seams up front is how testing effort lands on the critical paths and complex logic instead of every edge case.
Ask: "What's the public interface, and which seams should we test?" Give each proposed seam a one-line note on what it catches and what it misses.
When the shape of that interface is itself in question (how deep the module is, where the seam belongs, what the interface should expose), call the Skill tool with "codebase-design" for the vocabulary. It is the shared source of the module, interface, depth, seam, adapter, leverage and locality terms, and it is a reference to consult, not a session to run.
expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b), a snapshot derived by hand the same way, a constant asserted equal to itself), so it passes by construction and can never disagree with the code. Expected values must come from an independent source of truth: a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec.code-review skill), not the red → green implementation cycle.test cases passed, vs 11 / 22 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.