Testing Claude Skills
3 543 testing skills from 425 authors. They run test suites, check accessibility and catch what broke. Half of them fit into 1 799 tokens or less — that is what one costs your context window when the agent loads it. 404 ship runnable scripts rather than instructions alone. 2 of them cannot work without an MCP server, most often rube. We also found 429 copies of these same skills sitting in other people's repositories — counted once here, not 429 times.
3 543 unique 425 authors 2 updated this month 331 from vendors
When validating system performance under load, identifying bottlenecks through profiling, or optimizing application responsiveness. Covers load testing (k6, Locust), profiling (CPU, memory, I/O), and optimization strategies (caching, query optimization, Core Web Vitals). Use for capacity planning, regression detection, and establishing performance SLOs.
Playwright E2E testing specialist for web applications. Invoke for browser automation, E2E tests, Page Object Model, test flakiness, visual testing. Keywords: Playwright, E2E, browser testing, automation, Page Object.
Expert Python developer specializing in modern Python 3.11+ with deep expertise in type safety, async programming, testing, and production-grade code. Invoke for Pythonic patterns, type hints, pytest, async/await, dataclasses.
Comprehensive Test Driven Development guide. Master testing, debugging, fixing bugs, QA workflows, unit tests, integration tests, and coverage analysis.
Kapsamlı test stratejileri ve 2025 test araçları. Unit, integration, e2e ve visual testing.
Kullanıcı araştırma metodları, interview teknikleri, persona oluşturma ve usability testing rehberi.
Modern JavaScript/TypeScript testing with Vitest including mocking and coverage.
Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using Playwright. Supports verifying frontend functionality, debugging UI behavior, capturing browser screenshots, and viewing browser logs.
> Proactive bug-hunting methodology — autonomous codebase reconnaissance to find latent bugs, hidden failure modes, and ticking time bombs BEFORE they detonate in production. Use this skill whenever the user asks to "find bugs", "hunt for issues", "audit this codebase", "what could go wrong", "find what's broken", "stress-test this project", "find landmines", "what will bite me later", or any variation of proactive defect discovery. Also trigger when the user says "scan for problems", "pre-flight check", "what am I missing across the codebase", "find the weak spots", or asks for a proactive quality sweep before a release, merge, or deployment. This is NOT for debugging known errors (use systematic-debugging) or reviewing specific code you're handed (use hostile-review). This is for when there are no known errors yet and you need to go FIND them.
Generate thorough, interactive HTML testing checklists that help developers and testers systematically verify software — a real test plan organized into end-to-end flows, with a prominent progress bar, pass/fail/blocked step states, filter and search navigation, and syntax-highlighted code and command snippets. Always ends with a Submit button (calls `submitToClaude`) so results come back to the agent for failure triage and fixes. Use whenever the user wants to test, QA, verify, or validate a change, feature, release, PR, or bug-fix batch — "help me test this", "test plan", "QA checklist", "verification checklist", "smoke-test list", "regression checklist". Bug lists in issue trackers (Monday, Linear, Jira, GitHub…) are natural input — render the open items as a two-way checklist whose rows keep ticket ids, and offer to write verdicts back to the tracker after Submit. Every embedded snippet passes a redaction step so credential-shaped values never land in the artifact.
Preserve visual continuity across video scenes with previous-final-frame starts, camera swipes, carryover frames, transition QA, and boundary proofing. Use when a scene must begin from the exact last frame of a previous scene, when adding camera-move transitions, when replacing scene endings, or when debugging stale starting frames.
Verify final video renders and make tiny safe edits without breaking approved sync, including proof frames, contact sheets, media probing, stale theme scans, exact timestamp checks, carryover-frame refreshes, and re-render-only-affected-scenes workflows. Use when a user asks for final QA, HD/render verification, a small text/audio/color change, or regression checks after approved timing.
用精简流程帮你从想法进入 spec、design、build，并按需执行 QA 与发布门禁。
Tests in real browsers. Use when building or debugging anything that runs in a browser. Use when you need to inspect the DOM, capture console errors, analyze network requests, profile performance, or verify visual output with real runtime data via Chrome DevTools MCP.
Guides systematic root-cause debugging. Use when tests fail, builds break, behavior doesn't match expectations, or you encounter any unexpected error. Use when you need a systematic approach to finding and fixing the root cause rather than guessing.
Use when building, modifying, or reviewing user-facing UI, responsive states, accessibility, visual fidelity, functional QA, monkey testing, or product-grade frontend polish.
Optimizes application performance. Use when performance requirements exist, when you suspect performance regressions, or when Core Web Vitals or load times need improvement. Use when profiling reveals bottlenecks that need fixing.
Get Codex's review of an implementation plan before the user starts building — trigger when they want Codex (or a named GPT model like gpt-5.6) to review, critique, or pressure-test a plan. Applies to any plan-shaped artifact — a plan file, plan-mode plan, a migration/rearchitecture/integration/checkout write-up, or a doc describing how they intend to do something (pasted, at a repo path, or just described). Fire on any second-opinion phrasing — "poke holes in it", "sanity-check my plan", "run this past Codex", "get Codex's take", "flag the biggest risks", "look this over before I start", "did I miss edge cases, testing, or a rollback path?". The point is catching gaps, risks, missing steps, and better alternatives ahead of implementation. Do NOT use for reviewing already-written code or diffs (that's diff-review), mapping an existing codebase's architecture (codebase-analysis), or web/research questions.
Generate convex-test tests for the app's Convex functions.
>- Use this skill whenever the user describes a Copilot Studio agent in a sentence or two and wants a build-ready blueprint, or asks how to design, scope, or structure an agent (its type, topics, tools, knowledge, or welcome experience). Trigger on requests like "design a Copilot Studio agent that…", "turn this use case into an agent", "how should I structure this agent", or a pasted one-line use case. Do NOT trigger for testing an existing agent (that is the test-planner skill) or for generic Power Platform flows unrelated to an agent.
Pre-simulate how a defined set of role-based personas will react to an internal comms, launch, or enablement artefact before it ships. Use when the user asks to "run the persona panel", "pressure-test this comms against our personas", "QA this launch email/deck before it goes out", "how will each team react to this", or wants persona- and domain-level feedback on a broad internal artefact. Requires a personas file — bring your own (see references/personas.template.md). Do NOT use for 1:1 private comms, HR/performance matters, or legal/contractual language.
Guides developers through a human-supervised PDCA framework for AI code generation. Applies analysis, TDD, validation, and retrospection. Activates for sessions requiring systematic quality control.
Analyze test coverage and identify gaps with actionable recommendations
Transform SDD tasks into test-first TDD task pairs. Reads existing tasks from /create-tasks and generates paired test tasks with RED-GREEN dependencies. Use when user says "create tdd tasks", "add tdd pairs", "convert to tdd", or wants to apply test-first ordering to SDD tasks.
Execute TDD task pairs autonomously with RED-GREEN-REFACTOR verification. Orchestrates wave-based execution with strategic parallelism, routing TDD tasks to tdd-executor agents and non-TDD tasks to standard task-executor. Use when user says "execute tdd tasks", "run tdd tasks", "start tdd execution", or wants to execute TDD-paired tasks from create-tdd-tasks.
Generate test files from acceptance criteria or existing code. Supports criteria-driven mode (from specs/tasks) and code-analysis mode (from source files). Auto-detects test framework and spawns test-writer agents for parallel generation.
Run a full RED-GREEN-REFACTOR TDD workflow for a feature. Accepts a feature description, task ID, or spec section as input. Presents a plan for confirmation then runs autonomously through all TDD phases.
Executes diagnostic investigation tasks to test debugging hypotheses. Runs tests, traces execution, checks git history, and reports evidence. (converted from agent)
Executes diagnostic investigation tasks to test debugging hypotheses. Runs tests, traces execution, checks git history, and reports evidence. (converted from agent)
Universal layered testing strategy — generate a complete test plan, layered architecture, and execution plan based on project type (Backend+APP / Backend+WEB / Backend+APP+Embedded)
Discover missing UAT test scenarios from the user's perspective, confirm requirements through guided interviews, and output user story files in story-craftsman template + Gherkin Given/When/Then format. Use when the user mentions "add test cases", "missing tests for XX scenario", "write UAT cases", "write test scenarios", "brainstorm test cases", or discovers test coverage gaps. Should also trigger even if the user just mentions a feature "hasn't been tested for XX situation".
Downloads, exports, and inspects existing Arize traces and spans to understand what an LLM app is doing or debug runtime issues. Covers exporting traces by ID, spans by ID, sessions by ID, and root-cause investigation using the ax CLI. Use when the user wants to look at existing trace data, see what their LLM app is doing, export traces, download spans, investigate errors, or analyze behavior regressions.
Use when an implemented web app, UI feature, workflow, or frontend change needs evidence-based validation in a real browser. Runs interactive discovery, browser execution, screenshot analysis, console/error checks, critical-flow testing, stateful resume, and HTML reporting. Supports CLI-agnostic adapters including agent-browser, playwright-cli, Playwright MCP, Claude/Codex Chrome MCP tools, and browser-harness.
Use this skill when writing new features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code. Enforces test-driven development with 80%+ coverage including unit, integration, and E2E tests.
Systematic E2E testing workflow with evidence capture and reporting. Use when running integration tests, validating complete user flows, capturing test evidence, or generating test reports.
한국 홈택스 종합소득세 신고 범용 워크플로. 모두채움/일반신고, 사업·근로·기타소득 조회, 단순·기준경비율 vs 간편장부 선택 점검, 엑셀 수입·경비 대조, 공제 누락 체크, 제출 직전 QA. 종합소득세, 종소세, 경비율, 모두채움, 5월 신고 요청 시 사용. 동료·일반 납세자용. 자동 제출·납부 금지.
>- Specialized software engineering prompt methodology for Claude. Use when building prompts for system design, code review, incident response, security analysis, API design, architecture decisions, RFCs, ADRs, review," "system design prompt," "SRE prompt," "security review prompt," "incident response prompt," "API design prompt," "architecture decision prompt," "RFC prompt," "runbook prompt." Provides 11 tested approaches across identity, reasoning, and output for engineering analysis. Do NOT use for general coding help, writing code, or debugging — this builds prompts that shape engineering analysis, not code itself. Do NOT use for evaluating existing prompts (use rootnode-prompt-validation if available).
Find and own a defensible market position. Use when messaging sounds like competitors, conversion is weak despite awareness, repositioning a product, or testing positioning claims. Includes Crawl-Walk-Run rollout methodology and the word change that improved enterprise deal progression.
Manage Apple Ads with `asc ads`: separate auth, org lookup, campaigns, ad groups, ads, keywords, reports, raw API requests, and safe live testing.
Triage failing macOS tests across Xcode and SwiftPM workflows. Use when asked to run macOS tests, narrow failing scopes, explain assertion or crash failures, or separate real test regressions from setup and environment problems.
Investigate and fix flaky tests using Tuist test insights and local repeated test runs. Use when a user provides a flaky test URL, test case identifier, or asks to find and stabilize flaky tests.
Create, stabilize, and run UI end-to-end tests with Xcode (XCUIApplication/xcodebuild), including environment setup, focus/input stabilization, logging/attachments, and flakiness triage. Use when adding or debugging UI automation, writing new UI tests, or making them reliable.
Use for slow endpoints, p95/p99 latency, database query issues, frontend bundle/render performance, memory leaks, caching, profiling, or performance regressions.
Use for test-first development, regression tests, flaky test debugging, coverage gaps, test strategy, CI failures, or converting bugs into minimal reproducible tests.
Adversarial design audit that stress-tests a game feature, system, pitch, roadmap item, or product idea by assuming failure and identifying the most credible reasons it would fail. Use when pressure-testing a concept before production, performing a pre-mortem, challenging a feature that sounds good on paper, exposing blind spots in design thinking, or getting a hostile-but-constructive critique with concrete failure mechanisms and de-risking moves.
Audit an existing or proposed premium pass (battle pass, season pass) for value proposition integrity, progression health, free track balance, reward pacing, engagement loop quality, and economy impact. Use when evaluating a pass before launch, diagnosing why a pass is underperforming, reviewing a competitor's pass design, or stress-testing a proposed structure before committing to production.
Audit a game feature, system concept, prototype plan, or preproduction proposal to determine whether the prototype is meant to sell the idea or reveal unknowns, and whether the prototype scope matches that intent. Use when teams are unclear about why they are prototyping, when a prototype risks becoming a demo in disguise, or when precious prototype time may be spent proving known strengths instead of testing real uncertainties.
Audit game design goals, feature objectives, OKRs, initiative aims, or any stated design intent against the SMART criteria adapted for game design. Use when a user shares a design goal, player experience target, retention goal, or feature aim and wants it evaluated or rewritten. Trigger on phrases like "audit my design goals", "is this a good design objective", "my feature goal is...", "we want players to feel...", "our aim for this feature is...", or whenever someone states what a design should achieve and it feels vague or unmeasurable. Also trigger when a design document contains aims or success criteria that need stress-testing. Even soft goals like "players should feel powerful" are valid — apply the framework and return both the audit and a rewritten version.