super-review:testing

Identify testing anti-patterns in changed test and production files.

Updated May 15, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/mattnowdev/super-review --skill super-review-testing
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: super-review:testing
Source: https://github.com/mattnowdev/super-review/tree/main/skills/testing
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/mattnowdev/super-review --skill super-review-testing

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill identifies test anti-patterns that make suites pass for the wrong reasons, fail intermittently, or stop meaningfully validating production behavior.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Detects structural test flaws like mocks that only assert call counts instead of observable outcomes.
  • Flags snapshot misuse where snapshots become the only contract for new logic.
  • Finds non-determinism and timing issues such as real time, real randomness, and missing fake timers.
  • Evaluates test robustness including brittle selectors, shared mutable state, async races, and coverage games.
  • Improves test meaning by requiring negative-case parity, proper Arrange/Act/Assert structure, and mocks that match real behavior.

Quick Start

Ask the AI to review this PR’s test changes for brittle selectors, flaky time/random usage, weak assertions, and missing negative-case coverage, and to produce a bounded list of fix-before-merge items.

Frequently Asked Questions about super-review:testing

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I detect flaky tests and brittle mocking in my vitest or jest code review?

This test quality review flags non-determinism by detecting real time and random usage without fake timers, brittle selectors, and shared mutable state that cause intermittent test failures in vitest or jest suites.

How do I find weak assertions and snapshot misuse in automated tests?

To find weak assertions, review test deltas to ensure mocks match real behavior and assert observable outcomes rather than just call counts, while flagging any snapshots used as the only contract for new logic.

Does this test quality review require negative-case coverage for new production logic?

Yes, this test quality review requires negative-case coverage by flagging PRs that introduce production logic without corresponding test deltas, ensuring evidence-based behavior checks include both positive and negative cases.

How do I prevent misleading test suites that pass for the wrong reasons?

You prevent misleading test suites by enforcing Arrange/Act/Assert structure, verifying mocks match real behavior, and rejecting snapshot-only new assertions, ensuring automated tests validate actual production behavior.

What are the limitations of automated test anti-pattern detection for async races?

A limitation of automated test anti-pattern detection is that it focuses on structural code patterns within changed files, meaning it evaluates async races and brittle selectors by pattern evidence rather than executing the suite.