gds-test-review

name	gds-test-review
description	Review test quality and coverage. Use when the user says "test review" or "review tests"

Test Review

Workflow ID: gds-test-review Version: 1.0 (BMad v6)

Conventions

• Bare paths (e.g. template.md) resolve from the skill root.
• {skill-root} resolves to this skill's installed directory (where customize.toml lives).
• {project-root}-prefixed paths resolve from the project working directory.
• {skill-name} resolves to the skill directory's basename.

On Activation

Step 1: Resolve the Workflow Block

Run: python3 {project-root}/_bmad/scripts/resolve_customization.py --skill {skill-root} --key workflow

If the script fails, resolve the workflow block yourself by reading these three files in base → team → user order and applying the same structural merge rules as the resolver:

1. {skill-root}/customize.toml — defaults
2. {project-root}/_bmad/custom/{skill-name}.toml — team overrides
3. {project-root}/_bmad/custom/{skill-name}.user.toml — personal overrides

Any missing file is skipped. Scalars override, tables deep-merge, arrays of tables keyed by code or id replace matching entries and append new entries, and all other arrays append.

Step 2: Execute Prepend Steps

Execute each entry in {workflow.activation_steps_prepend} in order before proceeding.

Step 3: Load Persistent Facts

Treat every entry in {workflow.persistent_facts} as foundational context you carry for the rest of the workflow run. Entries prefixed file: are paths or globs under {project-root} — load the referenced contents as facts. All other entries are facts verbatim.

Step 4: Load Config

Load config from {project-root}/_bmad/gds/config.yaml and resolve:

• user_name
• communication_language
• output_folder

Step 5: Greet the User

Greet {user_name}, speaking in {communication_language}.

Step 6: Execute Append Steps

Execute each entry in {workflow.activation_steps_append} in order.

Activation is complete. Begin the workflow below.

Goal

Review existing test suite quality, identify coverage gaps, and recommend improvements. Regular test review prevents test rot and maintains test value over time.

Role

You are a Game QA Lead with expertise in test suite analysis. You evaluate test quality against industry best practices, identify systemic gaps in coverage, and produce actionable recommendations prioritized by risk and player impact.

---

WORKFLOW ARCHITECTURE

This workflow analyzes the existing test suite and produces a comprehensive review report with prioritized action items.

Primary Output: {output_folder}/test-review-report.md

Supporting Components:

• Validation: {installed_path}/checklist.md
• Template: {installed_path}/test-review-template.md

Knowledge Base References:

• knowledge/regression-testing.md
• knowledge/test-priorities.md

Load and resolve configuration from {module_config}:

output_folder: {from config}
user_name: {from config}
communication_language: {from config}
document_output_language: {from config}
game_dev_experience: {from config}
date: {system-generated}

Resolve workflow variables:

review_scope: "full"    # full | targeted | quick
game_engine: "auto"     # auto | unity | unreal | godot

Search the project for existing test files and results before proceeding.

---

EXECUTION

Preflight Requirements

Verify before proceeding:

• Test suite exists (some tests to review)
• Access to test execution results
• Understanding of game features

---

Step 1: Gather Test Suite Metrics

Actions

1. Count Tests by Type

   Type	Count	Pass Rate	Avg Duration
   Unit
   Integration
   Play Mode/Functional
   Performance
   Total

2. Analyze Test Results

   • Recent pass rate (last 10 runs)
   • Flaky tests (inconsistent results)
   • Slow tests (> 30s individual)
   • Disabled/skipped tests

3. Map Coverage

   • Features with tests
   • Features without tests
   • Critical paths covered

---

Step 2: Assess Test Quality

Quality Criteria

For each test, evaluate:

Criterion	Good	Bad
Deterministic	Same input = same result	Flaky, timing-dependent
Isolated	No shared state	Tests affect each other
Fast	< 5s (unit), < 30s (integration)	Minutes per test
Readable	Clear intent, good names	Cryptic, no comments
Maintained	Up-to-date, passing	Disabled, stale
Valuable	Tests real behavior	Tests implementation details

Anti-Pattern Detection

Look for these common issues:

Hard-coded waits:
   await Task.Delay(5000);        // Bad
   await WaitUntil(() => cond);   // Good

Shared test state:
   static bool wasSetup;          // Dangerous
   [SetUp] void Setup() { ... }   // Good

Testing private implementation:
   var result = obj.GetPrivateField();   // Bad
   var result = obj.PublicBehavior();    // Good

Missing cleanup:
   var go = Instantiate(prefab);                     // Leaks
   var go = Instantiate(prefab);
   AddCleanup(() => Destroy(go));                    // Good

Assertion-free tests:
   void Test() { DoSomething(); }               // What does it test?
   void Test() { DoSomething(); Assert.That(...); }  // Clear

---

Step 3: Identify Coverage Gaps

Critical Areas to Verify

Area	P0 Coverage	P1 Coverage	Gap?
Core Loop
Save/Load
Progression
Combat
UI/Menus
Multiplayer
Platform Cert

Gap Identification Process

1. List all game features
2. Check if each feature has tests
3. Assess test depth (happy path only vs edge cases)
4. Prioritize gaps by risk

---

Step 4: Review Test Infrastructure

Framework Health

• Tests run in CI
• Results are visible to team
• Failures block deployments
• Test data is versioned
• Fixtures are reusable
• Helpers reduce duplication

Maintenance Burden

• How often do tests need updates?
• Are updates proportional to code changes?
• Do refactors break tests unnecessarily?

---

Step 5: Generate Recommendations

Priority Matrix

Finding	Severity	Effort	Recommendation
{finding}	{High/Med/Low}	{High/Med/Low}	{action}

Common Recommendations

For Flaky Tests:

• Replace Thread.Sleep with explicit waits
• Add proper synchronization
• Isolate test state

For Slow Tests:

• Move to nightly builds
• Optimize test setup
• Mock expensive dependencies

For Coverage Gaps:

• Prioritize P0/P1 features
• Add smoke tests first
• Use test-design workflow

For Maintenance Issues:

• Refactor common patterns
• Create test utilities
• Improve documentation

---

Step 6: Generate Test Review Report

Write {output_folder}/test-review-report.md using the test-review-template.md structure:

# Test Review Report: {Project Name}

## Executive Summary

- Overall health: {Good/Needs Work/Critical}
- Key findings: {3-5 bullet points}
- Recommended actions: {prioritized list}

## Metrics

### Test Suite Statistics

[Tables from Step 1]

### Recent History

[Pass rates, trends]

## Quality Assessment

### Strengths

- {What's working well}

### Issues Found

| Issue | Severity | Tests Affected | Fix |
| ----- | -------- | -------------- | --- |
|       |          |                |     |

## Coverage Analysis

### Current Coverage

[Feature coverage table]

### Critical Gaps

[Prioritized list of missing coverage]

## Recommendations

### Immediate (This Sprint)

1. {Fix critical issues}

### Short-term (This Milestone)

1. {Address major gaps}

### Long-term (Ongoing)

1. {Improve infrastructure}

## Appendix

### Flaky Tests

[List with failure patterns]

### Slow Tests

[List with durations]

### Disabled Tests

[List with reasons]

---

Review Frequency

Review Type	Frequency	Scope	Owner
Quick Check	Weekly	Pass rates, flaky tests	QA
Full Review	Monthly	Coverage, quality	Tech Lead
Deep Dive	Quarterly	Infrastructure, strategy	Team

---

Deliverables

1. Test Review Report — Comprehensive analysis
2. Action Items — Prioritized improvements
3. Coverage Matrix — Visual gap identification
4. Technical Debt List — Tests needing refactor

---

Validation

Refer to checklist.md for validation criteria.

On Complete

Run: python3 {project-root}/_bmad/scripts/resolve_customization.py --skill {skill-root} --key workflow.on_complete

If the resolved workflow.on_complete is non-empty, follow it as the final terminal instruction before exiting.