Jeden Skill in Manus ausführen
mit einem Klick

Jeden Skill in Manus mit einem Klick ausführen

spdd-api-test

Sterne4

Forks0

Aktualisiert26. Mai 2026 um 20:50

Use in SPDD when API or system-boundary behavior must be verified with executable scenarios covering normal, boundary, and error cases from the REASONS Canvas.

Installation

Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.

In Manus ausführen

Quelle

danmestas

danmestas/wardrobe

GitHub-Repository öffnen Creator-Repositorys ansehen

Download

In Manus ausführen

Verwandte BerufeSOC

Basierend auf der SOC-Berufsklassifikation

Softwarequalitätssicherungsanalysten und -testerInformatik- und Mathematikberufe·SOC 15-1253

SKILL.md

readonly

name	spdd-api-test
version	0.1.0
targets	["claude-code","codex","gemini","pi"]
type	skill
description	Use in SPDD when API or system-boundary behavior must be verified with executable scenarios covering normal, boundary, and error cases from the REASONS Canvas.
category	{"primary":"workflow","secondary":["backpressure"]}

SPDD API Test

Generate and run boundary-level functional tests from the canvas acceptance criteria.

Announce at start: "I'm using the spdd-api-test skill to verify behavior at the system boundary."

When to use

Use for HTTP APIs, CLIs, message handlers, webhooks, workers, or other externally observable contracts. Skip when the change has no runnable boundary surface; use focused unit/integration tests instead.

Test design

Create a scenario table before code or script:

ID	Scenario	Input	Expected output	Source AC
T1	Happy path	...	...	AC1
T2	Boundary	...	...	AC2
T3	Error	...	...	AC3

Cover:

Normal business flow.
Boundary values and limits named in the canvas.
Invalid input and not-found paths.
Backward compatibility expectations.
Response shape or emitted side effects.

Script rules

Prefer existing project test harnesses over ad hoc scripts.
If a script is necessary, make expected-vs-actual output explicit.
Do not mock the system boundary the scenario is supposed to prove.
Keep credentials, production endpoints, and destructive operations out of generated scripts.

Gate

Run the scenarios. If behavior fails because the canvas intent is wrong or incomplete, use spdd-prompt-update before changing code. If behavior fails because code violates the canvas, fix code under spdd-generate.

Mehr aus diesem Repository

gleiches Repository

helland

danmestas/wardrobe

The Pat Helland lens: treat durable data as immutable, append-only facts that carry their own identity and version; and design across service, machine, or org boundaries assuming you cannot have distributed transactions — only idempotent, at-least-once messages that must be reconciled. Apply this on in-place updates and overwrites, "just UPDATE the row," two-phase commit or distributed transactions at scale, exactly-once delivery assumptions, shared mutable state across services, and any data that crosses a boundary of service, machine, org, or time. Trigger even when Helland isn't named — the smell is mutation-in-place and pretending distributed systems can be transactional.

2026-07-184

hickey

danmestas/wardrobe

The Rich Hickey lens: pursue simple (un-braided, one role) over easy (familiar, near-at-hand), decomplect concerns that got tangled together, and separate value, identity, state, and time. Apply this whenever "easy," "convenient," or "it's what we already use" is doing the work of justifying a design; when state is braided into logic, policy into mechanism, or data into behavior; when object-soup would be plainer as data; and when a hard design decision is being made at the keyboard under time pressure instead of thought through first. Trigger even when Hickey isn't named — the smell is complecting, and confusing "easy" with "simple."

2026-07-184

carmack

danmestas/wardrobe

The John Carmack lens: minimize the mutable state you have to reason about, do the simple thing before the clever one, and treat correctness tooling — static analysis, warnings-as-errors, determinism — as non-negotiable. Apply this on sprawling mutable state, "we'll clean it up later," debugging by print- statement whack-a-mole, silenced compiler warnings, nondeterministic or non-reproducible behavior, premature abstraction, perf work that skips measurement, and any "what should we actually work on" prioritization call. Trigger even when Carmack isn't named — the smell is code whose full set of states you can't hold in your head, and effort that isn't ruthlessly focused.

2026-07-184

bellard

danmestas/wardrobe

The Fabrice Bellard lens: build the smallest self-contained thing that fully does the job, get performance from insight instead of hardware, and reuse existing machinery instead of reinventing it. Apply this whenever code is growing dependencies, frameworks, services, or infrastructure to solve a problem that a smaller, sharper implementation could handle — or whenever someone says a thing needs a cluster, a big framework, or a rewrite. Use for size/complexity audits, "do we really need this dependency/service?" questions, performance work where the reflex is to add hardware or caching, green-field "should this be one file or a platform?" decisions, and any moment the answer is trending toward "that's impractical, you'd need X." Trigger even when the user doesn't name Bellard — the smell is scope inflation and reaching for resources over insight.

2026-07-184

vault-autoresearch

danmestas/wardrobe

Use when iteratively researching a topic and filing the synthesis into an Obsidian vault for later ingestion. Output goes to `<vault>/raw/` (NOT directly into wiki pages) so that `vault-ingest` can process it on its own schedule. Triggers: '/vault-autoresearch', 'autoresearch [topic]', 'research [topic] into the vault', 'deep dive into [topic]', 'find everything about [topic] for the vault', 'research and stage'.

2026-07-144

vault-ingest

danmestas/wardrobe

Ingest sources into the Obsidian wiki vault. Reads a source, extracts entities and concepts, creates or updates wiki pages, cross-references, and logs the operation. Supports files, URLs, and batch mode. Triggers on: ingest, process this source, add this to the wiki, read and file this, batch ingest, ingest all of these, ingest this url.

2026-07-144

name	spdd-api-test
version	0.1.0
targets	["claude-code","codex","gemini","pi"]
type	skill
description	Use in SPDD when API or system-boundary behavior must be verified with executable scenarios covering normal, boundary, and error cases from the REASONS Canvas.
category	{"primary":"workflow","secondary":["backpressure"]}

SPDD API Test

Generate and run boundary-level functional tests from the canvas acceptance criteria.

Announce at start: "I'm using the spdd-api-test skill to verify behavior at the system boundary."

When to use

Test design

Create a scenario table before code or script:

ID	Scenario	Input	Expected output	Source AC
T1	Happy path	...	...	AC1
T2	Boundary	...	...	AC2
T3	Error	...	...	AC3

Cover:

Normal business flow.
Boundary values and limits named in the canvas.
Invalid input and not-found paths.
Backward compatibility expectations.
Response shape or emitted side effects.

Script rules

Prefer existing project test harnesses over ad hoc scripts.
If a script is necessary, make expected-vs-actual output explicit.
Do not mock the system boundary the scenario is supposed to prove.
Keep credentials, production endpoints, and destructive operations out of generated scripts.