Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

analyzing-test-coverage

Analyze test coverage, the share of code exercised by tests, to find untested lines, branches, and functions. Get prioritized gaps, suggested test scenarios, comparisons with a baseline, and configuration for enforcing coverage thresholds in CI.

OriginalShow the original description

Analyze code coverage metrics and identify untested code paths. Use when analyzing untested code or coverage gaps. Trigger with phrases like "analyze coverage", "check test coverage", or "find untested code".

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Finding untested code paths
  • Prioritizing tests for conditions and error handling
  • Comparing coverage before and after changes
  • Setting minimum coverage requirements in CI

Files included (9)

  • SKILL.md5.7 KB
  • assets/configuration_template.yaml2.6 KB
  • assets/example_coverage_report.html3.4 KB
  • assets/README.md305 B
  • assets/report_template.html3.3 KB
  • references/README.md65 B
  • scripts/analyze_coverage.py4.7 KB
  • scripts/generate_report.py3.6 KB
  • scripts/README.md484 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Test Coverage Analyzer

Current State

!ls package.json pyproject.toml Cargo.toml go.mod 2>/dev/null || echo 'No project manifest found' !node -v 2>/dev/null || python3 --version 2>/dev/null || echo 'No runtime detected'

Overview

Analyze code coverage metrics to identify untested code paths, dead code, and coverage gaps across line, branch, function, and statement dimensions. Supports Istanbul/nyc (JavaScript/TypeScript), coverage.py (Python), JaCoCo (Java), and Go coverage tools.

Prerequisites

  • Coverage tool installed and configured (Istanbul/nyc, c8, coverage.py, JaCoCo, or go test -cover)
  • Test suite that can run with coverage instrumentation enabled
  • Coverage threshold targets defined (recommended: 80% lines, 70% branches)
  • Coverage output format set to JSON or LCOV for programmatic analysis
  • Git history available for coverage trend comparison

Instructions

  1. Run the test suite with coverage instrumentation enabled:
    • JavaScript: npx jest --coverage --coverageReporters=json-summary,lcov
    • Python: pytest --cov=src --cov-report=json --cov-report=term-missing
    • Go: go test -coverprofile=coverage.out ./...
    • Java: Configure JaCoCo Maven/Gradle plugin with XML report output.
  2. Parse the coverage report and extract per-file metrics:
    • Line coverage percentage per file.
    • Branch coverage percentage per file.
    • Function coverage percentage per file.
    • Uncovered line ranges (specific line numbers).
  3. Identify critical coverage gaps by prioritizing:
    • Files with coverage below the threshold (sort ascending by coverage %).
    • Files with high complexity but low coverage (use cyclomatic complexity if available).
    • Recently modified files with decreasing coverage trends.
    • Public API functions and exported modules lacking any tests.
  4. Analyze uncovered branches specifically:
    • Find if/else blocks where only one branch is tested.
    • Identify switch/case statements with missing case coverage.
    • Locate error handling paths (catch, except) never exercised.
    • Check || and && short-circuit conditions.
  5. Generate a prioritized action plan:
    • List top 10 files needing coverage improvement with specific line ranges.
    • Suggest test scenarios for each uncovered branch.
    • Estimate effort (small/medium/large) for each coverage improvement.
  6. Compare current coverage against the previous commit or baseline:
    • Calculate coverage delta per file.
    • Flag files where coverage decreased.
    • Verify new code added since baseline has adequate coverage.
  7. Write coverage enforcement configuration (coverage thresholds in Jest config, .coveragerc, or CI checks).

Output

  • Coverage summary report with overall and per-file metrics
  • Prioritized list of uncovered code paths with file:line references
  • Coverage delta report comparing against baseline
  • Suggested test cases for top coverage gaps
  • Coverage threshold configuration file for CI enforcement

Error Handling

ErrorCauseSolution
Coverage report shows 0%Tests ran but coverage instrumentation was not enabledVerify --coverage flag is passed; check that source files are not excluded by config
Coverage includes node_modulesCoverage collection scope too broadAdd collectCoverageFrom in Jest config; set --cov=src in pytest; exclude vendor dirs
Branch coverage much lower than line coverageConditional logic is only partially testedWrite tests for both truthy and falsy conditions on each branch; focus on edge cases
Coverage drops after refactorNew code added without corresponding testsSet coverageThreshold with global minimums; add --changedSince for incremental checks
Flaky coverage numbers between runsNon-deterministic test execution skipping code pathsSort tests deterministically; run coverage with --runInBand for consistent results

Examples

Jest coverage configuration with thresholds:

{
  "jest": {
    "coverageThreshold": {
      "global": {
        "branches": 70,
        "functions": 80,
        "lines": 80,
        "statements": 80
      },
      "src/utils/": {
        "branches": 90,
        "lines": 95
      }
    },
    "collectCoverageFrom": [
      "src/**/*.{ts,tsx}",
      "!src/**/*.d.ts",
      "!src/**/index.ts"
    ]
  }
}

Coverage gap analysis output:

Coverage Gaps (sorted by impact):
1. src/auth/oauth.ts        Lines: 45%  Branches: 30%  [Lines 42-67, 89-103 uncovered]
   Suggestion: Add tests for token refresh failure and expired session handling
2. src/api/middleware.ts     Lines: 62%  Branches: 41%  [Lines 28-35, 71-80 uncovered]
   Suggestion: Test rate limiting edge cases and malformed header handling
3. src/utils/parser.ts       Lines: 71%  Branches: 55%  [Lines 112-130 uncovered]
   Suggestion: Test malformed input, empty string, and encoding edge cases

Resources

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Add a synthetic-data CI gate for customer-owned Abridge integration code. Test consent handling, note-review handoffs, redaction, and rollback behavior with mocked vendor boundaries, without connecting CI to a live Abridge or EHR tenant.

  • Adding regression checks to an Abridge integration repository
  • Testing consent and note-release handling
  • Checking logs for sensitive data exposure
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Triage Abridge recording, note review, Epic handoff, and access problems using observed symptoms and approved guidance. Identify the affected workflow stage, organize a minimal timeline, and prepare a redacted escalation record for the responsible team.

  • Separate recording problems from upload failures
  • Investigate note creation delays and editor issues
  • Identify the responsible team for Epic handoff failures
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Map and review an Abridge clinical documentation workflow from consent and recording through draft review, evidence checks, edits, and final disposition. Keep clinician approval explicit, identify failure exits, and separate verified facts from tenant-specific details and pending approvals.

  • Map a clinical note workflow for a care setting
  • Check where consent and patient identity are verified
  • Review draft notes against linked evidence before sign-off
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Audit how clinician-reviewed Abridge note sections map into Epic templates and downstream workflows. Use approved test records to document destinations, exceptions, evidence, rollback steps, and a go or no-go decision for a specific environment.

  • Checking Abridge note section mappings to Epic templates
  • Auditing a department’s approved documentation handoff
  • Preparing test evidence and a go or no-go decision
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Review Abridge adoption and workflow value using local usage records, clinician feedback, and verified contract costs. Build an evidence based decision table covering adoption, quality, support burden, and options to expand, hold, or improve the rollout.

  • Reviewing adoption after an Abridge rollout
  • Preparing evidence for a renewal decision
  • Comparing workflow outcomes across care settings
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

Prepare a bounded support bundle for an Abridge issue using allowlisted operational details such as versions, coarse timestamps, and correlation references. Exclude recordings, transcripts, patient identifiers, credentials, and unrestricted logs, then document redactions and review details.

  • Preparing reviewed evidence for an Abridge support case
  • Documenting redactions and excluded data
  • Collecting approved operational details for an incident
jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.9KUpdated Oct 23, 2026

See all skills by jeremylongshore

Report a problem with this skill