test-driven-development
Helps your agent write tests that guide the development of new features or bug fixes.
What it does
This tool helps you write code more reliably. You write a test that describes what you want the code to do, then make the code work to pass that test.
When to use it
- ✓When adding a new feature.
- ✓When fixing a bug.
- ✓When you want to be sure the code does what it should.
Example of what to ask your AI
“Write a failing test for the login functionality, then create the code to make it pass.”
Want more? Open the sections below.
How to use
The easiest way: copy the message below and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any AI. It reads the skill and follows the instructions.
Skill link
Ready-to-paste message
How it works
First, you write a test that you know will fail. Then, you write the minimum code needed for that test to pass. Finally, you can clean up the code without breaking the test.
Installation
Easiest way: copy the skill link and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor asking it to follow the instructions.
In the terminal (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor), in your project folder:
npx skills add sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills --skill test-driven-developmentOr download just the file:
curl -L https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills/main/plugins/agentic-awesome-skills-claude/skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md -o SKILL.mdTechnical content (original SKILL.md)
Original text by the author, straight from GitHub.
Test-Driven Development (TDD)
Overview
Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.
Core principle: If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.
Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.
When to Use
Use for behavior changes where a repeatable test can demonstrate the requirement or reproduce the bug. Inspect the repository’s test runner and existing coverage first. For copy, generated outputs or low-impact configuration, use the appropriate focused validation rather than manufacturing a unit test.
Preserve existing work
Write the failing regression before the repair when feasible, and verify that it fails for the expected reason. If implementation already exists, preserve it and add characterization/regression tests. Do not delete user work, reset a branch or rewrite working code to reconstruct an ideal test-first history. State honestly whether the test preceded the fix.
Red-Green-Refactor
digraph tdd_cycle {
rankdir=LR;
red [label="RED\nWrite failing test", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffcccc"];
verify_red [label="Verify fails\ncorrectly", shape=diamond];
green [label="GREEN\nMinimal code", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccffcc"];
verify_green [label="Verify passes\nAll green", shape=diamond];
refactor [label="REFACTOR\nClean up", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccccff"];
next [label="Next", shape=ellipse];
red -> verify_red;
verify_red -> green [label="yes"];
verify_red -> red [label="wrong\nfailure"];
green -> verify_green;
verify_green -> refactor [label="yes"];
verify_green -> green [label="no"];
refactor -> verify_green [label="stay\ngreen"];
verify_green -> next;
next -> red;
}
RED - Write Failing Test
Write one minimal test showing what should happen.
<Good> ```typescript test('succeeds on the third attempt', async () => { let attempts = 0; const operation = async () => { attempts++; if (attempts < 3) throw new Error('fail'); return 'success'; };const result = await retryOperation(operation);
expect(result).toBe('success'); expect(attempts).toBe(3); });
Clear name, tests real behavior, one thing
</Good>
<Bad>
```typescript
test('retry works', async () => {
const mock = jest.fn()
.mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())
.mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())
.mockResolvedValueOnce('success');
await retryOperation(mock);
expect(mock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(3);
});
Vague name, tests mock not code </Bad>
Requirements:
- One behavior
- Clear name
- Real code (no mocks unless unavoidable)
Verify RED - Watch It Fail
MANDATORY. Never skip.
npm test path/to/test.test.ts
Confirm:
- Test fails (not errors)
- Failure message is expected
- Fails because feature missing (not typos)
Test passes? Determine whether it already characterizes the required behavior. For a regression, prove it detects the defect using the prior revision or an isolated controlled change; do not alter a correct assertion just to force red.
Test errors? Fix error, re-run until it fails correctly.
GREEN - Minimal Code
Write simplest code to pass the test.
<Good> ```typescript 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'); } ``` Just enough to pass </Good> <Bad> ```typescript async function retryOperation<T>( fn: () => Promise<T>, options?: { maxRetries?: number; backoff?: 'linear' | 'exponential'; onRetry?: (attempt: number) => void; } ): Promise<T> { // YAGNI } ``` Over-engineered </Bad>Don't add features, refactor other code, or "improve" beyond the test.
Verify GREEN - Watch It Pass
MANDATORY.
npm test path/to/test.test.ts
Confirm:
- Test passes
- Other tests still pass
- Output pristine (no errors, warnings)
Test fails? Fix code, not test.
Other tests fail? Fix now.
REFACTOR - Clean Up
After green only:
- Remove duplication
- Improve names
- Extract helpers
Keep tests green. Don't add behavior.
Repeat
Next failing test for next feature.
Good Tests
| Quality | Good | Bad |
|---|
…
FAQ
Why write the test first?
Writing the test first ensures you know exactly what the code needs to do and that the test actually verifies the desired behavior.
What does 'red-green-refactor' mean?
It's a cycle: 'Red' (write a failing test), 'Green' (write minimal code to pass), and 'Refactor' (clean up the code while keeping tests passing).
Can I write the code first?
It's possible, but writing the test first helps prevent errors and ensures the code meets requirements from the start.
Details
Original description by the author
Use a failing behavioral test to guide a feature or bug fix, then implement and refactor with relevant regression checks.
Popularity
- GitHub stars
- 48k
- Ranking position
- #4354
- License
- MIT
- Updated
- 10/15/2026
Comments
- …
More skills from this repository
00-andruia-consultant
Helps your agent start or improve AI projects. It analyzes code, suggests tools, and creates action plans in Spanish.
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
007
Lets your agent perform security audits and threat modeling. It's useful for protecting projects against attacks and vulnerabilities.
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
10-andruia-skill-smith
Helps your agent create or improve AI tools. It defines how tools work, writes documentation, and validates the structure.
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
20-andruia-niche-intelligence
Lets your agent create a summary about a specific industry. It's useful for understanding the context, rules, usage patterns, and risks of a project, using reliable sources.
sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
Similar skills
cpp-testing
Makes your agent write and improve tests for C++ code. It helps set up testing tools and fix errors.
affaan-m/ECC
csharp-testing
Helps your agent create tests for C# and .NET code. It uses best practices to ensure tests are efficient and reliable.
affaan-m/ECC
django-tdd
Enables your agent to apply testing strategies for Django with pytest-django and TDD. It's useful for writing robust tests and ensuring code quality, especially for DRF APIs.
affaan-m/ECC