hf-test-review

To validate RED and GREEN test evidence before code review, you can analyze testing artifacts to confirm fail-first effectiveness, behavior mapping to acceptance criteria, and risk coverage using a structured six-dimension scoring framework.

The best way to quantify test quality is by applying a six-dimension scoring framework to evaluate fail-first validity, behavior coverage, and risk coverage, ensuring your testing artifacts fully support downstream code review.

You can assess bug-patterns and test evidence by compiling and validating them against acceptance criteria and risk catalogs, requiring current RED/GREEN evidence to verify fail-first effectiveness and behavior mapping.

Yes, when evidence conflicts during a test review, the process outputs a single canonical next action, such as hf-code-review or hf-test-driven-dev, along with a reroute option and a review record skeleton to guide teams.

You need to run a test review when performing post-implementation test evaluations, pre-code-review assessments, or when fulfilling explicit client requests for test validation across artifacts like bug-patterns and evidence blocks.

Yes, the test review process enforces a requirement for current RED and GREEN evidence to validate fail-first effectiveness and behavior mapping, generating a structured score across six dimensions before proceeding.