Skip to main content سوق المهارات اكتشف واستكشف مهارات الذكاء الاصطناعي التي بناها المجتمع.
المهن ذات الصلة SOC
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
عرض تفاصيل Prompt يتجاوز الأمر المباشر Prompt المخصّص للمراجعة. افحص المصدر قبل تشغيله.
npx skills add https://github.com/proffesor-for-testing/agentic-qe --skill tdd-london-chicagoيبقى الأمر في سطر واحد. مرّر أفقيًا لمراجعته كاملًا قبل النسخ.
تفضّل نسخة محلية؟ نزّل الملفات المتاحة حاليًا لدى SkillsMP.
تحميل Zip جاري التحميل... المزيد من هذا المستودع Ruflo is a multi-agent orchestration platform for AI coding agents (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, Copilot, Gemini, Amp, +12 more). Use this skill when the user wants to (1) install/init ruflo in a project, (2) run multi-agent swarms with hierarchical coordination, (3) use ruflo's 314+ MCP tools for memory, routing, hooks, sub-agents, or workflows, (4) check ruflo status/version/doctor health, or (5) discover which of ruflo's 30+ plugins fits their task.
Build dependency-aware execution plans for complex Agentic QE, Ruflo, integration, migration, or multi-stream engineering programs. Use when Codex must turn research or requirements into phased work, select a small AQE fleet, map critical paths and parallel streams, define acceptance gates, or sequence risky changes. Use aqe-plan-quality instead when the primary output is only a test or quality plan.
Conduct evidence-first technical research for Agentic QE, Ruflo, related ruvnet projects, or external tools. Use when Codex must investigate a repository, compare current upstream changes, trace dependencies and history, distinguish verified facts from inference, or synthesize findings into actionable engineering recommendations. Do not use for a simple known-answer lookup or an implementation-only task.
name tdd-london-chicago description Apply London (mock-based) and Chicago (state-based) TDD schools. Use when practicing test-driven development or choosing testing style for your context. category development-practices priority high tokenEstimate 1100 agents ["qe-test-generator","qe-test-implementer","qe-test-refactorer"] implementation_status optimized optimization_version 1 last_optimized "2025-12-02T00:00:00.000Z" dependencies [] quick_reference_card true tags ["tdd","testing","london-school","chicago-school","red-green-refactor","mocks"] trust_tier 2 allowed-tools ["Read","Write","Edit","Bash","Grep","Glob"] validation {"schema_path":"schemas/output.json","validator_path":"scripts/validate-config.json"}
Test-Driven Development: London & Chicago Schools
<default_to_action>
When implementing TDD or choosing testing style:
IDENTIFY code type: domain logic → Chicago, external deps → London
WRITE failing test first (Red phase)
IMPLEMENT minimal code to pass (Green phase)
REFACTOR while keeping tests green (Refactor phase)
REPEAT cycle for next functionality
Quick Style Selection:
Pure functions/calculations → Chicago (real objects, state verification)
Controllers/services with deps → London (mocks, interaction verification)
Value objects → Chicago (test final state)
API integrations → London (mock external services)
Mix both in practice (London for controllers, Chicago for domain)
Critical Success Factors:
Tests drive design, not just verify it
Make tests fail first to ensure they test something
Write minimal code - no features beyond what's tested
</default_to_action>
Quick Reference Card
When to Use
Starting new feature with test-first approach
Refactoring legacy code with test coverage
Teaching TDD practices to team
Choosing between mocking vs real objects
TDD Cycle
Phase Action Discipline Red Write failing test Verify it fails, check message is clear Green Minimal code to pass No extra features, don't refactor Refactor Improve structure Keep tests passing, no new functionality
School Comparison
Aspect Chicago (Classicist) London (Mockist) Collaborators Real objects Mocks/stubs Verification State (assert outcomes) Interaction (assert calls) Isolation Lower (integrated) Higher (unit only) Refactoring Easier Harder (mocks break) Design feedback
Agent Coordination
qe-test-generator: Generate tests in both schoolsqe-test-implementer: Implement minimal code (Green)qe-test-refactorer: Safe refactoring (Refactor)
Chicago School (State-Based) Philosophy: Test observable behavior through public API. Keep tests close to consumer usage.
describe ('Order' , () => {
it ('calculates total with tax' , () => {
const order = new Order ();
order.addItem (new Product ('Widget' , 10.00 ), 2 );
order.addItem (new Product ('Gadget' , 15.00 ), 1 );
expect (order.totalWithTax (0.10 )).toBe (38.50 );
});
});
Domain logic with clear state
Algorithms and calculations
Value objects (Money, Email)
Simple collaborations
Learning new domain
London School (Mock-Based) Philosophy: Test each unit in isolation. Focus on how objects collaborate.
describe ('Order' , () => {
it ('delegates tax calculation' , () => {
const taxCalculator = {
calculateTax : jest.fn ().mockReturnValue (3.50 )
};
const order = new Order (taxCalculator);
order.addItem ({ price : 10 }, 2 );
order.totalWithTax ();
expect (taxCalculator.calculateTax ).toHaveBeenCalledWith (20.00 );
});
});
External integrations (DB, APIs)
Command patterns with side effects
Complex workflows
Slow operations (network, I/O)
Mixed Approach (Recommended)
describe ('OrderController' , () => {
it ('creates order and sends confirmation' , async () => {
const orderService = { create : jest.fn ().mockResolvedValue ({ id : 123 }) };
const emailService = { send : jest.fn () };
const controller = new OrderController (orderService, emailService);
await controller.placeOrder (orderData);
expect (orderService.create ).toHaveBeenCalledWith (orderData);
expect (emailService.send ).toHaveBeenCalled ();
});
});
describe ('OrderService' , () => {
it ('applies discount when threshold met' , () => {
const service = new OrderService ();
const order = service.create ({ items : [...], total : 150 });
expect (order.discount ).toBe (15 );
});
});
Common Pitfalls
❌ Over-Mocking (London)
const product = { getName : jest.fn (), getPrice : jest.fn () };
Better: Only mock external dependencies.
❌ Mocking Internals
expect (order._calculateSubtotal ).toHaveBeenCalled ();
Better: Test public behavior only.
❌ Test Pain = Design Pain
Need many mocks? → Too many dependencies
Hard to set up? → Constructor does too much
Can't test without database? → Coupling issue
Agent-Assisted TDD
await Task ("Generate Tests" , {
style : 'chicago' ,
target : 'src/domain/Order.ts' ,
focus : 'state-verification'
}, "qe-test-generator" );
const testIdea = "Order applies 10% discount when total > $100" ;
await Task ("Create Failing Test" , testIdea, "qe-test-generator" );
await Task ("Suggest Refactorings" , { preserveTests : true }, "qe-test-refactorer" );
Agent Coordination Hints
Memory Namespace aqe/tdd/
├── test-plan/* - TDD session plans
├── red-phase/* - Failing tests generated
├── green-phase/* - Implementation code
└── refactor-phase/* - Refactoring suggestions
Fleet Coordination const tddFleet = await FleetManager .coordinate ({
workflow : 'red-green-refactor' ,
agents : {
testGenerator : 'qe-test-generator' ,
testExecutor : 'qe-test-executor' ,
qualityAnalyzer : 'qe-quality-analyzer'
},
mode : 'sequential'
});
Related Skills
Remember Chicago: Test state, use real objects, refactor freely
London: Test interactions, mock dependencies, design interfaces first
Both: Write the test first, make it pass, refactor
Neither is "right." Choose based on context. Mix as needed. Goal: well-designed, tested code.
With Agents: Agents excel at generating tests, validating green phase, and suggesting refactorings. Use agents to maintain TDD discipline while humans focus on design decisions.
Gotchas
Agent skips Red phase and writes test + implementation together — enforce "test must fail first" by running test before writing code
London school over-mocking creates brittle tests that break on any refactor — mock at architectural boundaries, not every function
Chicago school tests become slow as integration scope grows — keep test boundaries tight
Agent defaults to jest.mock() for everything — prefer dependency injection for testability
Refactor phase is where agent cuts corners most — verify no behavior changes by checking test output is identical
