Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Run pytest tests with coverage, discover lines missing coverage, and increase coverage to 100%.
.claude/skills/pytest-coverage/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-21 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-22 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-17 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
The goal is for the tests to cover all lines of code.
Generate a coverage report with:
pytest --cov --cov-report=annotate:cov_annotate
If you are checking for coverage of a specific module, you can specify it like this:
pytest --cov=your_module_name --cov-report=annotate:cov_annotate
You can also specify specific tests to run, for example:
pytest tests/test_your_module.py --cov=your_module_name --cov-report=annotate:cov_annotate
Open the cov_annotate directory to view the annotated source code. There will be one file per source file. If a file has 100% source coverage, it means all lines are covered by tests, so you do not need to open the file.
For each file that has less than 100% test coverage, find the matching file in cov_annotate and review the file.
If a line starts with a ! (exclamation mark), it means that the line is not covered by tests. Add tests to cover the missing lines.
Keep running the tests and improving coverage until all lines are covered.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-07 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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, and 20 counted toward the lift figure. The other 2 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +50 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 20 comparable cases.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.