「assertions」の検索結果

Analyze failing tests to detect functional bugs in code. Takes repository and failing test output as input, analyzes execution behavior, assertions, and stack traces to identify suspicious code regions and root causes. Use when debugging test failures, investigating regression bugs, or understanding why tests fail. Explains the bug mechanism, identifies affected code, and suggests fixes based on test expectations vs actual behavior.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Generates automated test oracles to verify correct software behavior. Creates assertion-based oracles (expected values), property-based oracles (invariants), differential oracles (comparing implementations), and metamorphic oracles (input transformations). Use when you need to generate assertions for test cases, identify invariants that should always hold, compare new vs legacy implementations, create metamorphic test relationships, validate function correctness, or improve test coverage with better verification strategies. Supports Python (pytest, unittest, hypothesis) and Java (JUnit, property testing).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Generate comprehensive test case documentation from test code, test framework output, existing test docs, and source code context. Use when documenting test suites, creating test specifications, generating test coverage reports, onboarding developers to testing practices, or preparing QA documentation. Analyzes test functions (pytest, unittest) to extract test names, docstrings, assertions, and organization, then produces structured markdown with both overview-level summaries and detailed test case specifications including purpose, preconditions, steps, expected results, and test data. Triggers when users ask to document tests, generate test specifications, create test reports, summarize test coverage, or explain what tests do.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Updates Python test code to work with new versions of the code being tested. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Update tests after code changes, (2) Fix broken tests due to signature changes, (3) Update assertions to match new behavior, (4) Add test cases for new functionality, (5) Analyze code differences and their test impact, (6) Run tests and fix failures based on error messages. Takes old code, new code, and old tests as input, outputs updated tests that pass.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Selectively instruments code to capture runtime data for debugging failures and bugs. Use when investigating crashes, exceptions, unexpected behavior, test failures, or performance issues. Analyzes stack traces and error messages to identify suspicious code regions, then adds targeted logging, tracing, and assertions to capture variable values, execution paths, timing, and conditional branches. Supports Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, and C/C++.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Automatically updates regression tests based on interval analysis to maintain coverage of key program intervals. Use when code changes affect value ranges, conditionals, or control flow, and existing tests need updating to maintain interval coverage. Analyzes interval information from updated code, identifies coverage gaps, adjusts test inputs and assertions, removes redundant tests, and generates new tests for uncovered intervals. Supports Python, Java, JavaScript, and C/C++ with various test frameworks (pytest, JUnit, Jest, Google Test).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Generate concrete counterexamples when formal verification, assertions, or specifications fail. Use this skill when debugging failed proofs, understanding why verification fails, creating minimal reproducing examples, analyzing assertion violations, investigating invariant breaks, or diagnosing specification mismatches. Produces concrete input values, execution traces, and state information that demonstrate the failure.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Create ACSL (ANSI/ISO C Specification Language) formal annotations for C/C++ programs. Use this skill when working with formal verification, adding function contracts (requires/ensures), loop invariants, assertions, memory safety annotations, or any ACSL specifications. Supports Frama-C verification and generates comprehensive formal specifications for C/C++ code.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Analyzes surviving mutants from mutation testing to identify why tests failed to detect them. Takes repository code, test suite, and mutation testing results as input. Identifies root causes including insufficient coverage, equivalent mutants, weak assertions, and missed edge cases. Automatically generates actionable test improvements and new test cases. Use when analyzing mutation testing results, improving test suite effectiveness, investigating low mutation scores, generating tests to kill surviving mutants, or enhancing test quality based on mutation analysis.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Automatically generates executable test cases from model checking counterexample traces. Translates abstract counterexample states and transitions into concrete test inputs, execution steps, and assertions that reproduce property violations. Use when working with model checker outputs (SPIN, CBMC, NuSMV, TLA+, Java PathFinder, etc.) and needing to create regression tests, validate bug fixes, or reproduce verification failures in executable test suites.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Explain why counterexamples violate specifications by analyzing formal specifications (temporal logic, invariants, pre/postconditions, code contracts), informal requirements (user stories, acceptance criteria), test specifications (assertions, property-based tests), and providing step-by-step traces showing state changes, comparing expected vs actual behavior, identifying root causes, and assessing violation impact. Use when debugging test failures, understanding model checker output, explaining runtime assertion violations, analyzing static analysis warnings, or teaching specification concepts. Produces structured markdown explanations with traces, comparisons, state diagrams, and cause chains. Triggers when users ask why something failed, explain a violation, understand a counterexample, debug a specification, or analyze why a test fails.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Make AI-powered assertions about screen state

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use for bun:test syntax, assertions, describe/it, test.skip/only/each, and basic patterns.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when adding, adopting, debugging or updating Morphir CLI examples and morphir itest scenarios, including scenarios.md, .feature.md and .feature files, scenario metadata, Rego assertions and integration coverage.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Verify the accuracy of claims and statements by extracting individual assertions, identifying authoritative sources, cross-referencing evidence, and assigning confidence-scored verdicts. Use when the user requests fact checking or provides relevant inputs for this workflow.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Native Rust browser automation CLI for AI agents. Use when the user needs to interact with websites — navigating pages, filling forms, clicking buttons, taking screenshots, sharing a live browser view, narrating browser actions, extracting structured data, running assertions, testing web apps, or automating any browser task. Triggers include requests to "open a website", "fill out a form", "click a button", "take a screenshot", "show me the browser", "share the screen", "pause the browser", "step through this", "scrape data from a page", "test this web app", "login to a site", "automate browser actions", "visual regression test", "check for prompt injection", or any task requiring programmatic web interaction.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Migrate test files from `as` type assertions to @total-typescript/shoehorn. Use when user mentions shoehorn, wants to replace `as` in tests, or needs partial test data.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill when working with RenderDoc capture files (.rdc), analyzing GPU frames, tracing shaders, inspecting draw calls, or running CI assertions against GPU captures. Trigger phrases: "open capture", "rdc file", ".rdc", "renderdoc", "shader debug", "pixel trace", "draw calls", "GPU frame", "assert pixel", "export render target".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use AI to write NEW test code from specs, PRDs, user stories, code diffs, bug reports, or OpenAPI specs. Staged pipeline: requirements extraction → risk analysis → coverage matrix → scenario generation → oracle design → test code → human review, with guardrails against hallucinated APIs and weak assertions. Use when: "generate tests from spec," "tests from PRD," "tests from user story," "auto-generate test cases," "AI write tests for me." Not for: testing AI/LLM features in your product — use ai-system-testing. Not for: auditing a pre-existing test suite you did not just generate — use ai-qa-review (Step 7 here only reviews tests THIS pipeline produced). Related: playwright-automation, unit-testing, api-testing, qa-project-context.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

End-to-end testing of email-dependent flows — signup confirmation, password reset, magic-link login, OTP/MFA codes, and notification emails. Covers the capture-inbox decision tree (Mailpit, Mailosaur, MailSlurp, Ethereal), Playwright polling without fixed sleeps, regex extraction of links/OTPs from the email body, deterministic per-test addresses (plus-addressing, per-inbox), subject/from/header/link assertions, and SPF/DKIM/DMARC deliverability checks as a separate suite. Use when: "test the signup confirmation email," "password reset email test," "magic-link login test," "capture OTP from email," "Mailpit," "Mailosaur," "MailSlurp," "email arrives flaky in CI," "assert email subject/from/links." Not for: Sending transactional email from your app code, or API-only contract tests of an email provider — those are api-testing / app concerns. Email HTML rendering across clients (Outlook/Gmail dark mode) is out of scope (note it as a gap; use visual-testing or Litmus). Related: playwright-automation, api-testing, test-data-management, qa-project-context.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Test REST and GraphQL APIs with Playwright APIRequestContext, Supertest, or standalone HTTP clients. Covers schema validation with Zod 4/AJV, auth flow testing, CRUD lifecycle tests, error and header validation, pagination, and performance assertions. Use when: "API test," "endpoint test," "REST test," "GraphQL test," "schema validation," "Postman replacement." Not for: consumer-driven contract verification (Pact, broker) — use contract-testing; browser UI flows — use playwright-automation. Related: contract-testing, test-data-management, ci-cd-integration, playwright-automation.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Implement consumer-driven contract testing with Pact-JS (v16). Covers consumer test writing, broker-driven provider verification, Pact Broker setup, can-i-deploy as a deployment gate, webhook-triggered verification, pending pacts, and schema-first vs consumer-first approaches (OpenAPI/Ajv, Schemathesis). Use when: "contract test," "Pact," "consumer-driven," "API contract," "provider verification," "can-i-deploy." Not for: stubbing or mocking a dependency to isolate a test — use service-virtualization; general REST/GraphQL endpoint assertions against your own API — use api-testing. Related: api-testing, service-virtualization, ci-cd-integration, test-environments.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit a whole regression suite and prune/restructure it with evidence: per-test coverage fingerprinting, AST near-duplicate clustering, CI-history mining for never-failing and flaky tests, prune decision rules (redundant/obsolete/low-value/keep), smoke/core/extended tiering by risk and defect-detection history, and a defensible "what we deleted and why" record. Deletion is destructive — quarantine and human sign-off are mandatory. Use when: "audit the test suite," "prune redundant tests," "find duplicate tests," "which tests can we delete," "restructure into smoke/core/extended," "is this test pulling its weight," "shrink the regression suite." Not for: Judging whether an individual test is WELL-WRITTEN (smells, assertions) — that is ai-qa-review. Healing one flaky test at runtime — that is test-reliability. Bulk selector regeneration after a UI refactor — that is selector-drift-recovery. Related: ai-qa-review, coverage-analysis, test-reliability, risk-based-testing, qa-project-context.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。