test-health

name	test-health
description	Project-wide test-strategy audit — derive the suite's shape and shape-vs-architecture fit, map coverage to the Agile Testing Quadrants, roll up coverage + mutation health, flag flaky tests and automation maturity, and produce an ordered improvement plan. Delegates CD-determinism + pipeline assessment to cd-test-architecture. Use when the user says "audit our tests", "how healthy is our test suite", "test strategy review", or runs /test-health. Advisory — writes a report, does not edit.
role	worker
user-invocable	true
argument-hint	[--path <dir>]

Test Health

Overview

An advisory, project-wide skill: it produces the strategic-health view of a test suite that a team needs periodically — the suite's shape vs. its architecture, Agile Testing Quadrant coverage, coverage + mutation health rolled up to ROI, flaky-test management, and automation maturity — then an ordered improvement plan. It complements, and does not duplicate, cd-test-architecture: that skill owns the CD-determinism + pipeline-placement assessment, which this skill delegates to rather than re-deriving.

Grounded in: knowledge/testing-quadrants.md, knowledge/test-pyramid.md (shapes + shape↔architecture fit), knowledge/test-automation-maturity.md, knowledge/test-smells.md (project smells / flakiness). It calls the cd-test-architecture, /test-design, and mutation-testing skills and folds their results into the strategic rollup.

Constraints

• Advisory only. Write a report; do not edit code or tests. Hand fixes to /apply-fixes, refactors to /plan / /build.
• Delegate, don't re-derive. The architecture/pipeline section comes from cd-test-architecture — summarize its output, never restate or contradict its CD-determinism findings.
• Strategic altitude. This is a suite-level diagnostic. Per-file findings belong to test-review / test-smell-review; per-unit design belongs to test-design-advisor. Point to them; don't reproduce them.
• No scoring reinvention. Quantitative quality scoring and per-file design findings come from /test-design (Farley Score + test-review / test-smell-review) — consume them; summarize the themes and link to its report, don't re-derive or reproduce the per-file table.
• Be concise. One report; findings as tables, each item mapped to a concrete next move. No restating the knowledge files — cite them.

Parse Arguments

Target repo/subtree path (default: cwd). Detect the test runner, coverage tool, and CI config from manifests and .github//.gitlab-ci.yml/etc.

Steps

1. Pain-point calibration (non-blocking)

In the first response, ask one optional question — "What hurts most about testing here right now (slow suite / flaky CI / fear of changing code / low confidence / something else)?" — then continue the audit immediately without waiting for an answer. If the user answers later, weight the improvement plan toward it.

2. Trivial-suite short-circuit

If the suite is tiny (few test files), shows no shape pathology, and follows clear conventions, stop here and return a one-paragraph summary ("suite is small and healthy; nothing structural to fix; revisit when it grows") instead of the full diagnostic.

3. Derive the test shape + architecture fit

Inventory tests by layer (unit / integration / component / contract / E2E). Derive the actual shape and compare it to the shape the architecture should produce, using the Other shapes + Shape ↔ architecture fit tables in test-pyramid.md. Report the mismatch (e.g. tall pyramid over thin-glue code, or ice-cream cone), not the silhouette alone.

4. Quadrant coverage

Classify coverage across the four quadrants (testing-quadrants.md) as strong / thin / empty, and for each gap name the business impact of leaving it empty (e.g. empty Q3 → no human catches confusing flows; empty Q4 → non-functional failures reach prod).

5. Delegate architecture + pipeline

Invoke cd-test-architecture on the target. Summarize its findings (which tests can't run in a clean pre-merge gate, target architecture, migration path) in one section — do not re-derive.

6. Test-design + mutation health (ROI)

Invoke /test-design on the target and consume its results: the suite-wide Farley Score, the dominant test-review / test-smell-review themes (weak assertions, non-determinism, fixture/structure smells, testability blockers), and the advisor's testability verdicts. Then invoke mutation-testing on the critical-logic modules only (not the whole repo — that's the ROI framing). Roll both up: where is coverage high but mutation-weak (assertions that don't catch bugs)? Where do test-design smells concentrate? Where is critical logic under-covered? Prioritize by risk, not by raw %. Both feed the ordered plan (Step 8) — summarize the themes and link to the /test-design report for per-file detail; do not reproduce it.

7. Flaky-test + automation maturity

Flag flakiness signals (test-smells.md project/behavior smells: order-dependence, unstubbed clock/RNG, real I/O at unit level) and a management recommendation (quarantine + fix, don't retry). Assess automation maturity with test-automation-maturity.md: report the rung and the single-point-of-change metric, scaled by suite size (graduated thresholds).

8. Ordered improvement plan

Produce a risk-ordered, incremental plan — each item a concrete next move (which layer to add, which shape to correct, which quadrant to fill, which abstraction to extract, which weak-assertion or smell cluster to fix), driven by the test-design themes and mutation hotspots from Step 6 and weighted by the pain point from Step 1.

9. Report

Write reports/test-health-<date>.md.

Output

## Test Health — <repo> (<date>)

**Shape**: <derived> · **Expected for this architecture**: <expected> · **Fit**: <match|mismatch + why>

### Quadrant coverage
| Quadrant | Status | Gap impact |

### Architecture & pipeline (via cd-test-architecture)
<one-paragraph summary + link to its report>

### Test-design & mutation health (via /test-design + mutation-testing)
<Farley score · top test-design themes · mutation ROI hotspots · under-covered critical logic>

### Flakiness & automation maturity
<flaky signals + management rec · maturity rung · single-point-of-change metric>

### Improvement plan (ordered)
1. <highest-leverage move> …

Integration

• Front door for periodic test-strategy review; the unified entry point that runs cd-test-architecture + /test-design + mutation-testing and rolls their results into one strategic view.
• /test-design runs inside this flow (Step 6) and also stands alone for a focused per-file review. For forward design of a specific module, use test-design-advisor. This skill is the strategic rollup that consumes their output.