L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Développement · SKILL.md

tdd

tdd

Test-first at pre-agreed seams — one test, one implementation, tracer-bullet red/green; independent expected values; substitutions only at the seam's boundary class; launch Phase 4 reference.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: tdd description: Test-first at pre-agreed seams — one test, one implementation, tracer-bullet red/green; independent expected values; substitutions only at the seam's boundary class; launch Phase 4 reference.

TDD

Red-green in small steps, at seams that were agreed in advance. In a launch run the seam list is C2's approved output; outside launch, agree the seams with the user before the first test exists — a seam nobody approved gets no tests.

The loop

One test → one implementation → repeat:

  1. Write the next test at a seam. Run it. Watch it fail for the reason you expect — a test that cannot fail is not a test.
  2. Implement the smallest change that turns it green.
  3. Repeat. Each test is a tracer bullet: a narrow but complete path through the behavior, not a layer finished in isolation.

Rules

  • Expected values come from an independent source of truth — a spec line, a worked example, a documented output. Never from the implementation under test: a test that asserts what the code happens to do is a mirror, not a check.
  • Substitute at the seam's declared boundary class only — in-process, locally substitutable, owned-remote port, or true-external, the class C2 records for each seam. No substitutes inside the boundary the test is exercising.
  • Refactoring is not part of the loop. It belongs to the review stage; the repair worker owns it. Do not refactor mid-red-green.
  • A bug fix starts with the failing test that reproduces it — reproduction before theory, the debugger's rule.
  • When proposing a seam, say in one line what it catches and what it lets through — a seam choice nobody can price is a guess, not a decision.

When no seam fits

If the behavior cannot be tested at any approved seam, stop and say so: report the missing seam as a finding (it feeds architecture-survey and refit) rather than inventing a seam or testing through internals.

Output

  • The seam list used, with boundary classes and each seam's catch/miss line
  • Red/green evidence — the failing run and the passing run
  • Any seam-absence findings
Skills enregistrées