test-cleaner

name	Test Cleaner
description	Multi-phase test suite optimization with adversarial review
phase	review

Test Cleaner Skill

Overview

Analyze, optimize, and clean a project's test suite through a multi-phase workflow with adversarial review. Produces machine-readable output and feeds findings into compound-agent memory.

Methodology

Phase 1: Analysis

Spawn multiple analysis subagents in parallel:

• Cargo-cult detector: Find fake tests, mocked business logic, trivial assertions
• Redundancy analyzer: Identify overlapping/duplicate test coverage
• Independence checker: Verify tests don't depend on execution order or shared state
• Invariant tracer: Map which invariants each test verifies (Lamport framework)
• Coverage analyzer: Identify untested code paths and modules

Phase 2: Planning

Synthesize analysis results into a refined optimization plan:

• Categorize findings by severity (P1/P2/P3)
• Propose specific changes for each finding
• Estimate impact on test suite speed and coverage
• Iterate with subagents until the plan is comprehensive

Phase 3: Adversarial Review (CRITICAL QUALITY GATE)

This is THE KEY PHASE -- the most important phase in the entire workflow. NEVER skip, NEVER rush, NEVER settle for "good enough."

Expose the plan to two neutral reviewer subagents:

• Reviewer A (Opus): Independent critique of the optimization plan
• Reviewer B (Sonnet): Independent critique from a different perspective

Both reviewers challenge assumptions, identify risks, and suggest improvements.

Mandatory iteration loop: After each reviewer pass, if ANY issues, concerns, or suggestions remain from EITHER reviewer, revise the plan and re-submit to BOTH reviewers. Repeat until BOTH reviewers explicitly approve with ZERO reservations. Do not proceed to Phase 4 until unanimous, unconditional approval is reached.

This is the critical quality gate. Loop as many times as needed. The test suite must be bulletproof before execution begins.

Phase 4: Execution

Apply the agreed changes:

• Machine-readable output format: ERROR [file:line] type: description
• Include REMEDIATION suggestions and SEE references
• Run targeted test validation using the project's test runner (e.g., {{QUALITY_GATE_TEST}} with module/path filters)

Phase 5: Verification

• Run full test suite ({{QUALITY_GATE_TEST}}) and linter ({{QUALITY_GATE_LINT}}) after changes
• Compare before/after metrics (count, duration, coverage)
• Feed findings into compound-agent memory via ca learn

Targeted Test Execution

Adapt test commands to the project's stack:

• Module isolation: Run tests for a specific module/path (e.g., {{QUALITY_GATE_TEST}} with path filter)
• Subset testing: Run a subset of tests for fast feedback (e.g., critical/smoke tests only)
• Full suite: Run {{QUALITY_GATE_TEST}} for complete validation

Memory Integration

• Run ca search "test optimization" before starting
• After completion, capture findings via ca learn
• Feed patterns into CCT system for future sessions

Common Pitfalls

• Deleting tests without verifying coverage is maintained elsewhere
• Optimizing for speed at the cost of correctness
• Settling for partial approval or cutting the Phase 3 review loop short before BOTH reviewers approve with zero reservations
• Making changes without machine-readable output
• Not feeding results back into compound-agent memory

Quality Criteria

• All 5 phases completed (analysis, planning, review, execution, verification)
• Both adversarial reviewers approved with zero reservations after iterative refinement
• Machine-readable output format used throughout
• Full test suite passes after changes
• Coverage not degraded
• Findings captured in compound-agent memory