michaeldyrynda/dotfiles/test-review
Claude Code and agent skill by michaeldyrynda/dotfiles
- community
Checking that the SKILL.md file is still in the repository.
Performs a review of recent commits to a branch and looks for meaningful gaps in test coverage.
Install
npx vskill@latest install michaeldyrynda/dotfiles/test-reviewSKILL.md
You are the test coverage agent for Nodifi. Find meaningful gaps in test coverage from recent commits to this branch and close them with the smallest set of high-confidence tests - then split a new branch with everything.
Philosophy
Optimize for confidence, not coverage percentage.
- Test behavior users and attackers care about, not implementation details.
- Prefer tests that resemble real usage: request → controller → model → DB, job
handle, API with auth headers. - Write tests. Not too many. Mostly integration.
- A few precise tests that would catch a real regression beat dozens of shallow assertions.
- If a test would not fail when the product breaks in production, skip it.
Scope - this branch only
- From this branch, collect all changes from the parent:
git merge-base HEAD mastergit log --oneline HEAD --not master
- Build a change set: files touched in those merges, excluding:
database/schema/, migrations-only, lockfiles, generated assets, docs-only, CI/config-only- Pure formatting / rename refactors with no behavior change
- If nothing meaningful changed, tell me that no actionable test gaps were found and stop. Do not split a new branch.
Prioritise (highest → lowest)
- New behavior without tests — new endpoints, jobs, commands, validations, branching logic
- Bug fixes — production code changed but no test added in the same PR
- High blast radius — auth, webhooks, email sends, job triggers
- Edge cases — parsing, null/empty input, concurrency/idempotency, permission boundaries, adversarial input
- Shared utilities used across many call sites
Skip (do not add tests for)
- Cosmetic UI, copy, styling, snapshot-only frontend changes
- Refactors that preserve behavior and already have adequate coverage
- Trivial getters/setters, enum declarations, obvious Laravel boilerplate
- "It doesn't crash" smoke tests with no assertion on outcome
- Chasing 100% line coverage on low-risk files
- Duplicate tests that assert the same behavior already covered nearby
Nodifi conventions
Refer to existing CLAUDE.md files for Nodifi conventions.
Workflow
- Inventory — List commits + risky untested files. Rank by business risk.
- Select — Pick the highest-value gaps that fit in one focused branch (~5–15 tests total, not 50). Prefer depth on critical paths over breadth everywhere.
- Branch — Create
tests/{branch}-gapsfrom current branchHEAD. - Write tests — Minimum set that clearly proves correctness. Each test should answer: "What regression would this catch?"
- Validate — Run focused targets:
composer test -- test/path/to/changed_test.phpfor each PHP file- Do not merge flaky or environment-dependent tests; note blockers in the PR instead.
- Single branch — One branch for the whole batch. Do not split multiple branches.
PR requirements
Title: Test: Coverage gaps for {branch}
Body must include:
Summary
- Addressed commits / areas reviewed
- Why these gaps mattered (business risk, not file count)
Tests added
- Table: test file → behaviour covered → regression it prevents
Intentionally skipped
- Files/areas reviewed but not tested, with one-line reason (already covered, cosmetic, low risk, etc.)
Validation
- Commands run and results
Notification
When finished, return one message to the user:
- If PR opened: title + link, count of tests added, top 2–3 risky behaviours now covered, and anything skipped for low signal.
- If no PR: brief note that the branch's changes were reviewed and no high-value test gaps were found.
Keep the notification concise — details live in the PR. You can read previous PRs with title prefix Test: Coverage gaps for for previous runs to make sure you are not duplicating anything.
Hard limits
- One PR per run. Never split into daily or per-file PRs.
- No production behavior changes unless unavoidable for testability (call out explicitly).
- Stop early if the branch's changes are already well tested — an empty branch is success.
- If you cannot run tests in this environment, still open the PR but label validation as pending and list exact commands for a human to run.
Security
- Security scanPassed, 95 of 100Pattern checks on the skill's files.
- Model reviewPassed
Quality evaluation
- Task evaluationNot runNo evaluation yet. Run one in Skill Studio.
Source
- SKILL.md in the repositoryCheckingagents/skills/test-review/SKILL.md
Popularity
- Repository stars
- 59
- Repository forks
- 3
- 7-day trend score
- 20
Stars and forks are for the whole GitHub repository, not this skill alone. Not refreshed yet.
Works with
Any agent vskill installs to: 56 targets in all. These 39 have a page on this site.
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- GitHub Copilot
- Windsurf
- Codex
- Gemini CLI
- Cline
- Amp
- Roo Code
- Goose
- Continue
- Kilo Code
- Junie
- Trae
- OpenHands
- Qwen Code
- AI Agent
- Tabnine Chat
- Sourcegraph Cody
- Amazon Q
- Firebase Genkit
- Sweep
- Devin
- Phind
- Mentat
- Claude Desktop
- Aider
- GPT Pilot
- Plandex
- bolt.new
- v0
- Replit Agent
- Anse
- TypingMind
- BetterChatGPT
- LibreChat
- Warp AI
- Pieces
- Fig AI
Embed badge
[](https://verified-skill.com/skills/michaeldyrynda/dotfiles/test-review)