「测试」分类共 528 个 Skill，按仓库 star 排序。分类自动生成，仅供参考。
tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills1.6kWhen a claim, doc, test, metric, or assumption conflicts with observed behavior, stop theorizing from the map and verify the live code or data; let territory overrule.
tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills1.6kWhen a real test is too rare, large, or irreversible, run a controlled counterfactual: isolate one variable, fix conditions, trace the mechanistic chain, and bound what the result implies.
microsoft/azure-skills1.6kConfigure Azure API Management as an AI Gateway for AI models, MCP tools, and agents. WHEN: semantic caching, token limit, content safety, load balancing, AI model governance, MCP rate limiting, jailbreak detection, add Azure OpenAI backend, add AI Foundry model, test AI gateway, LLM policies, configure AI backend, token metrics, AI cost control, convert API to MCP, import OpenAPI to gateway.
microsoft/azure-skills1.6kAzure VM/VMSS router. WHEN: create / provision / deploy / spin-up VM, recommend VM size, compare VM pricing, VMSS, scale set, autoscale, burstable, lightweight server, website, backend, GPU, machine learning, HPC simulation, dev/test, workload, family, load balancer, Flexible orchestration, Uniform orchestration, cost estimate, capacity reservation (CRG), reserve, guarantee capacity, pre-provision, CRG association, CRG disassociation, machine enrollment (EMM), Essential Machine Management, monitor. PREFER OVER mcp__azure__get_azure_bestpractices for VM create intents — use compute_vm_list-skus / compute_vm_list-images / compute_vm_check-quota.
microsoft/azure-skills1.6kPre-deployment validation for Azure readiness. Run deep checks on configuration, infrastructure (Bicep or Terraform), RBAC role assignments, managed identity permissions, and prerequisites before deploying. WHEN: validate my app, check deployment readiness, run preflight checks, verify configuration, check if ready to deploy, validate azure.yaml, validate Bicep, test before deploying, troubleshoot deployment errors, validate Azure Functions, validate function app, validate serverless deployment, verify RBAC roles, check role assignments, review managed identity permissions, what-if analysis, validate Container Apps deployment.
rohitg00/skillkit1.5kApplies the scientific method to debugging by helping users form specific, testable hypotheses, design targeted experiments, and systematically confirm or reject theories to find root causes. Use when a user says their code isn't working, they're getting an error, something broke, they want to troubleshoot a bug, or they're trying to figure out what's causing an issue. Concrete actions include isolating failing components, forming and testing hypotheses, analyzing error messages, tracing execution paths, and interpreting test results to narrow down root causes.
rohitg00/skillkit1.5kGuides the red-green-refactor TDD workflow: write a failing test first, implement the minimum code to make it pass, then refactor while keeping tests green. Use when a user asks to practice TDD, write tests first, follow red-green-refactor, do test-driven development, write failing tests before code, or phrases like 'make the test pass', 'test coverage', or 'unit tests before implementation'.
rohitg00/skillkit1.5kPerforms systematic root cause analysis to identify the true source of bugs, errors, and unexpected behavior through structured investigation phases — not just treating symptoms. Use when a user reports a bug, crash, error, or broken behavior and needs to debug, troubleshoot, or investigate why something is not working; especially for complex or intermittent issues across multiple components. Applies the Five Whys method, hypothesis-driven testing, stack trace analysis, git blame/log evidence gathering, and causal chain documentation to isolate and confirm root causes before applying any fix.
rohitg00/skillkit1.5kPerforms a structured five-stage code review covering requirements compliance, correctness, code quality, testing, and security/performance. Each stage uses targeted checklists and categorized feedback (Blocker/Major/Minor/Nit) with actionable suggestions and rationale. Use when the user asks for code review, PR feedback, pull request review, or wants their code checked for bugs, style issues, or vulnerabilities — triggered by phrases like "review my code", "check this PR", "review my changes", "pull request review", or "code feedback".
rohitg00/skillkit1.5kReviews test code to identify and fix common testing anti-patterns including flaky tests, over-mocking, brittle assertions, test interdependency, and hidden test logic. Flags bad patterns, explains the specific defect, and provides corrected implementations. Use when reviewing test code, debugging intermittent or unreliable test failures, or when the user mentions flaky tests, test smells, brittle tests, test isolation issues, mock overuse, slow tests, or test maintenance problems.
rohitg00/skillkit1.5kApplies proven testing patterns — Arrange-Act-Assert (AAA), Given-When-Then, Test Data Builders, Object Mother, parameterized tests, fixtures, spies, and test doubles — to help write maintainable, reliable, and readable test suites. Use when the user asks about writing unit tests, integration tests, or end-to-end tests; structuring test cases or test suites; applying TDD or BDD practices; working with mocks, stubs, spies, or fakes; improving test coverage or reducing flakiness; or needs guidance on test organization, naming conventions, or assertions in frameworks like Jest, Vitest, pytest, or similar.
silverstein/minutes1.5kVerify that Minutes is properly set up and working — model downloaded, mic accessible, directories exist, no stale state. Use when the user says "is minutes working", "check my setup", "verify minutes", "test recording setup", "why isn't minutes working", "minutes health check", or after running setup for the first time.
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kArchitecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized, or asks "does this follow clean architecture?" or "why does everything depend on everything?". Also triggers for onboarding requests: "explain this codebase to a new developer" or "give me a codebase tour" (use onboarding mode). Do NOT trigger for: PR-level code review (use brooks-review) or line-level refactoring questions — this skill analyzes structural/module-level concerns, not individual functions.
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kTech debt assessment that identifies, classifies, and prioritizes maintainability problems — helping teams build a refactoring roadmap — drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks about tech debt, refactoring priorities, what to clean up first, or asks "why is this so hard to change?", "what should we fix first?", or "how do I justify refactoring to management?". Do NOT trigger for: server health checks, HTTP /health endpoints, Kubernetes probes, database health, or application uptime — "health" in those contexts is infrastructure, not code quality. Also not for single-function refactoring questions.
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kMaintenance orchestrator for the brooks-lint plugin itself. Runs a sequential subagent pipeline — author → eval → QA → trigger-audit → release — to add or edit a skill, refresh the eval suite, keep the four manifests + all README translations + CHANGELOG + AGENTS/GEMINI in sync, audit trigger boundaries, and cut releases. Drives the five agents in .claude/agents/ (skill-author, eval-curator, consistency-qa, trigger-boundary-auditor, release-manager). Triggers when the maintainer asks to work ON brooks-lint itself: "add a new skill", "edit the brooks-debt guide", "update the eval suite", "fix the trigger descriptions", "make this change and validate it", "release brooks-lint", "bump and publish", and follow-ups: "re-run", "re-validate", "update that skill", "redo the audit", "do the X part again". Do NOT trigger for: USING the brooks-lint analysis skills on some target codebase (that's brooks-review / brooks-audit / brooks-debt / brooks-test / brooks-health / brooks-sweep); generic questions about brooks-lint that don't ask to change it; or maintenance of a different plugin.
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kCombined codebase health dashboard that scores a project across all four quality dimensions — PR quality, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — in a single pass, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user wants an overall quality assessment, asks "how healthy is this codebase?", "run all the checks", "I need a health score before the release", or wants to onboard a new team with a quality overview. Do NOT trigger for: server health checks, HTTP health endpoints, Kubernetes liveness/readiness probes, database health, or application uptime. Also do not trigger when the user specifically requests only one dimension — use the corresponding focused skill instead (brooks-review / brooks-audit / brooks-debt / brooks-test).
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kPR code review that surfaces decay risks, design smells, and maintainability issues with concrete Symptom → Source → Consequence → Remedy findings, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to review code, check a PR, shares a diff or pastes code asking "does this look right?" / "any issues here?" / "ready to merge?", or asks for feedback on a function, class, or file. Also triggers when user mentions: code smells / refactoring / clean architecture / DDD / SOLID principles / Hyrum's Law / deep modules / tactical programming / conceptual integrity / Brooks's Law / Mythical Man-Month / second system effect. Do NOT trigger for: questions about how to write code from scratch, language syntax questions, or framework/tool questions where no existing code is shared.
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kFull-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user wants to "fix everything", "sweep the codebase", "auto-fix all issues", "clean up the whole project", or asks for a single command that both diagnoses and remediates quality problems. Do NOT trigger for: read-only audits or health reports where the user only wants findings without code changes; single-dimension reviews (use the focused skill instead: brooks-review / brooks-audit / brooks-debt / brooks-test); server health checks, HTTP /health endpoints, Kubernetes probes, database health, or application uptime.
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kTest quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow execution, poor readability. Triggers when: user asks about test quality, shares test files for review, or expresses frustration: "tests keep breaking whenever I change anything", "our tests take forever", "tests pass but bugs still reach production", or "we have too many mocks". Do NOT trigger for: writing new tests from scratch (use the regular test-writing workflow) or testing framework/syntax questions — this skill reviews an existing suite for structural quality problems, not individual test authoring.
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kScaffold a new brooks-lint analysis skill so it passes `npm run validate` and `npm run evals` on the first try — generates skills/{name}/SKILL.md (with the mandatory "Do NOT trigger for:" clause and a Process section citing guide step ranges) plus skills/{name}/{name}-guide.md (sequentially numbered steps), then appends paired eval scenarios. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "add a new skill", "scaffold a skill", or "create a brooks-lint mode". Do NOT trigger for: editing an existing skill's content, adding a single eval to an existing skill, or authoring skills for some other plugin.
hyhmrright/brooks-lint1.5kCut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file (README badges, docs site metadata), write the CHANGELOG entry, validate, then commit, push, tag, and publish the GitHub release. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "release", "cut a release", "ship a new version", or "bump and publish" brooks-lint. Do NOT trigger for: propagating an already-decided version without releasing (use `npm run bump` directly), CHANGELOG edits alone, or questions about the release process that don't ask to perform it.
evo-hq/evo1.5kLand the winning experiment from an evo run as a clean, mergeable change -- open a PR when the repo has a remote, otherwise merge into the working branch. Distills the best-scoring experiment down to the minimal diff that reproduces its behaviour, shaped for the qualities a maintainer merges on (scope discipline, test integrity, style adherence), then attaches an advisory mergeability report. Use when the user invokes /evo:ship, asks to land/merge/ship the best result, or wants to turn a finished optimization into a pull request.
evo-hq/evo1.5kLand the winning experiment from an evo run as a clean, mergeable change -- open a PR when the repo has a remote, otherwise merge into the working branch. Distills the best-scoring experiment down to the minimal diff that reproduces its behaviour, shaped for the qualities a maintainer merges on (scope discipline, test integrity, style adherence), then attaches an advisory mergeability report. Use when the user invokes /evo:ship, asks to land/merge/ship the best result, or wants to turn a finished optimization into a pull request.
openclaw/crabbox1.5kStructured code review through the shared OpenClaw agent-skills installation.