Skip to main content

engram-testing-coverage

TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.

Source facts

Repository
Gentleman-Programming/engram
Last source activity
September 25, 2026 at 17:40
Detected SKILL.md language
English
Stars
7,811
Forks
817

Install options

The review-first prompt is selected by default. You can switch to a direct command or download a local copy.

Review the source files

Read SKILL.md and any companion files shown by SkillsMP before deciding whether to install.

Showing SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Source instructions · Read-only preview
name
engram-testing-coverage
description
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
license
Apache-2.0
metadata
{"author":"gentleman-programming","version":"1.0"}
## When to Use Use this skill when: - Adding new behavior - Fixing a bug - Refactoring logic with branch complexity --- ## TDD Loop 1. Write a failing test for the target behavior. 2. Implement the smallest code to pass. 3. Refactor while keeping tests green. 4. Add edge/error-path tests before closing. --- ## Coverage Rules - Cover happy path + error paths + edge cases. - Prefer deterministic tests over flaky integration paths. - Add seams only when branches are impossible to trigger naturally. - Keep runtime behavior unchanged when adding seams. --- ## Verification Ownership Verification is evidence about the candidate; CI is the automated execution venue, not a substitute for local focused evidence. - For behavior changes, run a focused regression test and tests for the affected package(s) locally before proposing the change. Report the commands and outcomes. - Use targeted coverage when useful to find missed behavior or branches. Do not require a numeric coverage target or total module coverage for every PR. - After the candidate is pushed to a PR, GitHub CI owns the full unit suite (`go test ./...`), E2E suite (`go test -tags e2e ./internal/server/...`), lint, and applicable platform checks. Do not report CI evidence until those checks actually run. - When there is no PR or the candidate is unpushed, or when risk justifies more verification, run the additional applicable checks locally. Report checks that could not run as missing evidence rather than claiming CI covered them. Avoid duplicating the broad suite locally by default when PR CI will run it.
View on GitHub