tdd
The facts
Its description
Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration tests.
The description the agent reads to decide when to use it.
When it starts
The agent picks this skill when the person wants to build a feature or fix a bug test-first, says "red-green-refactor", or asks for integration tests. It is the reference for running the red → green loop and for what makes a test worth keeping.
Things a person might say (the model's guesses)
- “Let's build the checkout feature test-first.”
- “Can we do red-green-refactor on this bug?”
- “I want integration tests for the new API, not unit tests against internals.”
A model's summary of when it is used.
Files it mentions
tests.md, mocking.md
Files the text names, such as ones to read or write. Found by matching words, so treat them as pointers.
What it leads to
- calls codebase-design only when the interface shape is itself in question line 26
Other skills this one hands off to, calls, requires or offers instead, as a model read them.
What leads to it
- ask-matt hands off to this ask-matt, line 30
- diagnosing-bugs calls this only when a correct seam exists diagnosing-bugs, line 116
- implement calls this where possible, at pre-agreed seams implement, line 11
- implement-spec calls this implement-spec, line 31
Other skills that hand off to this one, call it, require it or offer it instead, as a model read them.
Licence
MIT, from LICENSE
The terms its author shares it under, which let it be shown here.
Other files in this skill (3) Close
The text
Most marks come from matching words in the file, so treat them as pointers.
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.
Raw lines 12 to 17Seams: 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.
Raw lines 18 to 27Anti-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.
From mattpocock/skills at 4ae2317, 2026-10-31. Skills read by DeepSeek V4.1 Flash on 2026-11-04. Summary and techniques by Claude Opus 5.5 on 2026-11-06.