Test Audit
Invoke whenever writing, changing, reviewing, or sweeping tests in the eve repository.
Install
npx skills add vercel/eve --skill test-audit -g -a claude-code -y- Repository
- vercel/eve5.8k
- Category
- Testing
- Updated
- 3d ago
- License
- Apache-2.0
- Context cost
- Mediumabout 2,431 tokens
- Runs scripts
- No, instructions only
What it does
Invoke whenever writing, changing, reviewing, or sweeping tests in the eve repository. Authoring gate for new tests plus audit workflow for low-value, slow, implementation-coupled, or duplicative tests and the test-only production seams they demand.
Test audit
Adapted from the OpenClaw
test-audit
skill for eve's test tiers and tooling.
Three modes, one value bar. Authoring mode gates every new or changed test at write time. Audit mode runs focused sweeps of tests that re-assert source, duplicate stronger proof, couple behavior to implementation, or keep test-only production seams alive. Continue broad audits as separate coherent follow-up PRs; optimize for confidence, not deletion count. Campaign mode prunes one whole subsystem's test surface (every test file one core area or package owns); before starting one, read CAMPAIGN.md.
Read the root AGENTS.md testing section first. It
defines eve's four tiers (unit, integration, scenario, e2e); a test belongs in
the tightest tier that can express its assertion.
Authoring gate
Before adding any test, answer four questions; a missing answer means do not add it yet:
- What observable behavior, invariant, or independent contract does it protect?
- What credible regression makes it fail?
- Why does existing coverage not already catch that failure? Each contract has one primary test owner at the strongest boundary; another layer needs its own distinct risk, such as a transport or lifecycle failure the owner cannot reach. Prefer extending a table-driven case or shared fixture over a near-duplicate test; consolidate duplicated setup in the same change.
- Does it need a production seam (export, flag, wrapper, injection hook) that no production caller needs? If yes, move the test to the real boundary instead.
