testing-flexible

bgrober's avatarfrom bgrober

Use when implementing features to write effective tests. Encourages test-first but allows prototyping.

⭐0stars🔀0forks📁View on GitHub🕐Updated Jan 7, 2026⬇️1downloads

When & Why to Use This Skill

This Claude skill enables a balanced approach to software testing, promoting high-quality code through effective test-first strategies while maintaining development velocity during prototyping. It provides structured guidance for identifying critical test paths, implementing the Red-Green-Refactor cycle, and managing tests across different development stages and languages like TypeScript and Swift.

Use Cases

  • Implementing complex business logic and data transformations that require high reliability and comprehensive edge-case coverage.
  • Reproducing and fixing software bugs by writing regression tests first to ensure the issue is resolved and won't reappear.
  • Accelerating the exploration phase of a project by using 'Prototype Mode' to iterate quickly without the overhead of immediate test maintenance.
  • Securing public API surfaces and authentication flows by establishing robust automated test suites and contract validation.
  • Refactoring legacy codebases with confidence using the Red-Green-Refactor pattern to improve code structure without breaking existing functionality.
nametesting-flexible
descriptionUse when implementing features to write effective tests. Encourages test-first but allows prototyping.

Flexible Testing

Overview

Write tests for critical paths and complex logic. Test-first is encouraged but not mandatory.

Core principle: Tests should give you confidence, not slow you down.

When to Use

Strong recommendation (test-first):

  • Complex business logic
  • Edge cases and error handling
  • Security-critical code
  • Bug fixes (test reproduces bug first)
  • Public API surfaces

Optional (test-after or skip):

  • UI/view code that changes frequently
  • Prototype/exploration phase
  • Configuration and setup
  • Generated code
  • Simple CRUD operations

Two Modes

Production Mode (Default)

Write tests for critical functionality. Test-first encouraged.

1. Write failing test for critical behavior
2. Implement minimal code to pass
3. Add tests for edge cases
4. Refactor with confidence

Prototype Mode

Exploring ideas? Skip tests temporarily.

1. Build the prototype
2. Get feedback, iterate
3. Once design is stable: write tests
4. Or: throw away prototype, rebuild with tests

To enter prototype mode: Tell Claude "I'm prototyping" or "skip tests for now"

What to Test

Always Test

Area Why
Business logic Core value of your app
Data transformations Easy to get wrong
API responses Contract with clients
Auth/permissions Security critical
Error handling Users will hit edge cases

Consider Testing

Area When
UI components When logic is complex
Integration points When external APIs involved
Performance When SLAs matter

Usually Skip

Area Why
UI layout Changes frequently, hard to test
Third-party code Already tested
Trivial getters/setters No logic to test
Generated code Trust the generator

Test-First Pattern

When you do write test-first, follow RED-GREEN-REFACTOR:

RED - Failing Test

test('retries failed operations 3 times', async () => {
  let attempts = 0;
  const operation = () => {
    attempts++;
    if (attempts < 3) throw new Error('fail');
    return 'success';
  };

  const result = await retryOperation(operation);

  expect(result).toBe('success');
  expect(attempts).toBe(3);
});

GREEN - Make It Pass

async function retryOperation<T>(fn: () => Promise<T>): Promise<T> {
  for (let i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
    try {
      return await fn();
    } catch (e) {
      if (i === 2) throw e;
    }
  }
  throw new Error('unreachable');
}

REFACTOR - Clean Up

Once tests pass, improve the code while keeping tests green.

Swift/XCTest Specifics

Basic Test Structure

import XCTest
@testable import YourApp

final class GradingServiceTests: XCTestCase {

    func test_gradeReturnsScoreForValidImage() async throws {
        let service = GradingService()
        let result = try await service.grade(image: testImage)

        XCTAssertNotNil(result.score)
        XCTAssertGreaterThan(result.score!, 0)
    }

    func test_gradeThrowsForInvalidImage() async {
        let service = GradingService()

        do {
            _ = try await service.grade(image: Data())
            XCTFail("Expected error")
        } catch {
            // Expected
        }
    }
}

Testing Actors

func test_actorStateIsolated() async {
    let service = SyncService()

    // Actor methods are async
    await service.sync(item: testItem)

    let synced = await service.pendingItems
    XCTAssertTrue(synced.isEmpty)
}

Testing @Observable

func test_authStateUpdatesOnSignIn() async throws {
    let authService = AuthService()

    XCTAssertFalse(authService.isAuthenticated)

    try await authService.signIn(with: mockCredentials)

    XCTAssertTrue(authService.isAuthenticated)
}

TypeScript/Vitest Specifics

Basic Test Structure

import { describe, it, expect } from 'vitest'
import { gradeImage } from './grading'

describe('gradeImage', () => {
  it('returns score for valid image', async () => {
    const result = await gradeImage(testImageBase64)

    expect(result.score).toBeDefined()
    expect(result.score).toBeGreaterThan(0)
  })

  it('throws for invalid image', async () => {
    await expect(gradeImage('')).rejects.toThrow()
  })
})

Testing Edge Functions

import { createClient } from '@supabase/supabase-js'

describe('process-item function', () => {
  it('returns 401 without auth', async () => {
    const response = await fetch(`${FUNCTION_URL}/process-item`, {
      method: 'POST',
      body: JSON.stringify({ itemId: '123' })
    })

    expect(response.status).toBe(401)
  })
})

Good Tests

Quality Good Bad
Focused One behavior per test test('validates, saves, and notifies')
Readable Clear name describes what's tested test('test1')
Independent No shared state between tests Tests fail in isolation
Fast Milliseconds, not seconds Slow tests get skipped

When Tests Are Hard

If testing is painful, the design might be the problem:

Symptom Likely Cause Fix
Need many mocks Too coupled Dependency injection
Huge setup Complex object graph Simplify design
Flaky tests Hidden state/timing Make dependencies explicit
Can't test in isolation God objects Break into smaller units

Checklist Before Shipping

[ ] Critical paths have tests
[ ] Edge cases covered
[ ] Error cases handled
[ ] Tests pass
[ ] No flaky tests

Don't need 100% coverage. Need confidence in critical functionality.