test-fixing

name	test-fixing
description	Run tests and systematically fix all failing tests using smart error grouping. Use when user asks to fix failing tests, mentions test failures, runs test suite and failures occur, or requests to make tests pass.

Test Fixing

Purpose

Run tests and systematically fix all failing tests using smart error grouping. Use when user asks to fix failing tests, mentions test failures, runs test suite and failures occur, or requests to make tests pass.

This skill provides operational guidance for Test Fixing, including tool usage patterns, workflows, and quality expectations aligned with Syncolab skill standards.

When to Use

• Use when the user needs help with Test Fixing.
• When integrations for this domain are available and the task matches the workflows below.

When NOT to Use

• When the task is unrelated to Test Fixing or covered by a more specific skill.
• When required integrations or credentials are unavailable.

Expected Outcome

• Correct use of domain tools with verified results (not fabricated).
• Clear summary of actions taken, data returned, and recommended next steps.
• Errors and missing permissions reported explicitly.

Inputs to Gather

• User goal, constraints, and any identifiers (URLs, IDs, project keys).
• Available tool sets and connection status.
• Relevant context from related systems before destructive writes.

Workflow

1. Confirm the request maps to Test Fixing and required tools are available.
2. Gather identifiers and scope (project, channel, repo, date range, etc.).
3. Follow the domain guidance below; prefer list/search before get/update when applicable.
4. Execute tool calls using schemas from the integration; never invent tool output.
5. Summarize results and offer logical follow-ups.

Test Fixing

Systematically identify and fix all failing tests using smart grouping strategies.

When to Use

• Explicitly asks to fix tests ("fix these tests", "make tests pass")
• Reports test failures ("tests are failing", "test suite is broken")
• Completes implementation and wants tests passing
• Mentions CI/CD failures due to tests

Systematic Approach

1. Initial Test Run

Run make test to identify all failing tests.

Analyze output for:

• Total number of failures
• Error types and patterns
• Affected modules/files

2. Smart Error Grouping

Group similar failures by:

• Error type: ImportError, AttributeError, AssertionError, etc.
• Module/file: Same file causing multiple test failure
• Root cause: Missing dependencies, API changes, refactoring impacts

Prioritize groups by:

• Number of affected tests (highest impact first)
• Dependency order (fix infrastructure before functionality)

3. Systematic Fixing Process

For each group (starting with highest impact):

1. Identify root cause

• Read relevant code
• Check recent changes with git diff
• Understand the error pattern

2. Implement fix

• Use Edit tool for code changes
• Follow project conventions (see CLAUDE.md)
• Make minimal, focused changes

3. Verify fix

• Run subset of tests for this group
• Use pytest markers or file patterns:

  uv run pytest tests/path/to/test_file.py -v
  uv run pytest -k "pattern" -v
  

• Ensure group passes before moving on

4. Move to next group

4. Fix Order Strategy

Infrastructure first:

• Import errors
• Missing dependencies
• Configuration issues

Then API changes:

• Function signature changes
• Module reorganization
• Renamed variables/functions

Finally, logic issues:

• Assertion failures
• Business logic bugs
• Edge case handling

5. Final Verification

After all groups fixed:

• Run complete test suite: make test
• Verify no regressions
• Check test coverage remains intact

Best Practices

• Fix one group at a time
• Run focused tests after each fix
• Use git diff to understand recent changes
• Look for patterns in failures
• Don't move to next group until current passes
• Keep changes minimal and focused

Example Workflow

User: "The tests are failing after my refactor"

1. Run make test → 15 failures identified
2. Group errors:

• 8 ImportErrors (module renamed)
• 5 AttributeErrors (function signature changed)
• 2 AssertionErrors (logic bugs)

3. Fix ImportErrors first → Run subset → Verify
4. Fix AttributeErrors → Run subset → Verify
5. Fix AssertionErrors → Run subset → Verify
6. Run full suite → All pass ✓

Tool Availability Rules

Access	Behavior
Full tool access	Execute workflows, verify outputs, report errors.
Read-only	Inspect and plan; provide exact commands or dispatch request for writes.
No integration	State limitation; do not fabricate API results.

Related tool sets

• github
• vscode

Review / Decision / Execution Criteria

• Prefer smallest safe change; confirm destructive actions with the user.
• Use evidence from tool responses; cite IDs and links when present.
• Match integration-specific conventions (JQL, RFC3339, A1 notation, etc.).

Output Format

Report:

1. What was requested and what was done.
2. Key results (tables or bullets).
3. Errors, blockers, or missing permissions.
4. Suggested next steps.

Quality Bar

• Specific, actionable, and grounded in tool output.
• Concise unless the user asked for detail.
• Respect rate limits, pagination, and API semantics.

Safety and Boundaries

• Do not commit secrets, tokens, or PII into skills or user-visible logs.
• Do not fabricate validation, send, or write confirmations.
• Confirm destructive operations (delete, destroy, mass update) when appropriate.

Escalation / Dispatch Rules

• If the task spans multiple domains, use or suggest related skills via relationships.skills.
• If write access is required but unavailable, dispatch or ask the user to enable tools.

References

• Legacy content migrated from skills/old_skills.json (test-fixing).
• skills/skill.instruction.md, skills/meta.instructions.md