SKILL.md
Test-Driven Development#
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.
What a good test is#
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.
Seams: where tests go#
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.
Anti-patterns#
- Implementation-coupled: mocks internal collaborators, tests private methods, or verifies through a side channel (querying the database instead of using the interface). The tell: the test breaks when you refactor but behavior hasn't changed.
- Tautological: the assertion recomputes the expected value the way the code does (
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. - Horizontal slicing: writing all tests first, then all implementation. Bulk tests verify imagined behavior: you test the shape of things rather than user-facing behavior, the tests go insensitive to real changes, and you commit to test structure before understanding the implementation. Work in vertical slices instead: one test → one implementation → repeat, each test a tracer bullet that responds to what the last cycle taught you.
Rules of the loop#
- Red before green. Write the failing test first, then only enough code to pass it. Don't anticipate future tests or add speculative features.
- One slice at a time. One seam, one test, one minimal implementation per cycle.
- Refactoring is not part of the loop. It belongs to the review stage (see the
code-reviewskill), not the red → green implementation cycle.
用途与依赖
作者没写,这些是平台读文件后整理的,以文件为准。
使用示例
请求:帮我用 TDD 给购物车加一个结算功能。
预期
技能会先询问并列出建议的测试接缝(例如 checkout(cart, paymentMethod) 这个公共接口),每条注明能捕获什么、遗漏什么,与用户确认后再开始循环。随后按垂直切片推进:先写一个失败的测试(如“用户可以用有效购物车完成结算”),再写刚好通过的最小实现,重复下一片。测试只通过公共接口断言行为,期望值使用独立已知的字面量,外部支付等系统边界才使用 mock,并提醒重构属于代码评审阶段而非红绿循环内。
- 适用场景
- 用户想以测试先行的方式开发新功能
- 用户想以测试先行的方式修复缺陷
- 用户提到 red-green-refactor 或红绿循环
- 用户需要编写集成测试而非单元测试
- 用户想评审现有测试是否耦合了实现细节
- 用户需要确定在哪些公共接口(接缝)上写测试
- 用户需要关于何时 mock、如何设计可 mock 接口的指导
- 输入
- 要实现的功能或要修复的缺陷描述
- 项目的公共接口与候选测试接缝
- 用户对测试接缝的确认
- 项目使用的语言与测试框架(如 Jest)
- 项目中的 GLOSSARY.md 或 ADR 等领域约定(如有)
- 输出
- 建议的测试接缝清单及各自能捕获/遗漏的内容
- 按红绿循环逐个产出的失败测试与最小实现
- 符合行为验证原则的测试代码
- 对反模式(实现耦合、同义反复、横向切片)的检查与修正建议
- 运行环境
- 未说明
- 依赖
- 无

