Test Review Skill

Two-phase review: First analyze coverage gaps, then add approved tests.

Preset Configuration:

•Focus: Test completeness, edge cases, quality
•Quality Gate: No new gaps found for 1 iteration (review comprehensive)
•Reviewer Type: Test Coverage Analyst
•Max Iterations: 4

When to Use

•After implementing a feature to verify test coverage
•Before release to check critical paths are tested
•When adding tests to existing code
•Periodic test health checks

Required Information

•Target - code module to check coverage for (e.g., src-tauri/src/calculations.rs)
•Reference (optional) - business rules or plan defining what should be tested

Phase 1: Review (Findings Only)

Step 1: Identify Test Files

Find tests for target:

bash

# Rust - find test module
grep -l "test_" src-tauri/src/*_tests.rs

# Check inline tests
grep -A5 "#\[cfg(test)\]" src-tauri/src/{module}.rs

Step 2: Run Tests (Baseline)

bash

npm run test:backend

Note current test count and status.

Step 3: Create Review Document

Create {TARGET_DIR}/_test-review.md:

markdown

# Test Coverage Review

**Target:** {TARGET}
**Reference:** {REFERENCE}
**Started:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Status:** In Progress
**Focus:** Completeness, edge cases, test quality

**Baseline:** N tests, [Pass / Fail]

## Iteration 1

### Findings

[To be filled by review agent]

Step 4: Execute Review Loop

For each iteration (max 4):

Spawn Review Agent:

code

Task tool (general-purpose):
  description: "Test review iteration N"
  prompt: |
    You are a Test Coverage Analyst reviewing tests for {TARGET}.

    Reference (if provided): {REFERENCE}
    Previous findings (if any): [summary from _test-review.md]

    Your job:

    1. **Coverage Analysis**
       - What functions/methods exist in {TARGET}?
       - Which have corresponding tests?
       - Which are missing tests?

    2. **Edge Case Analysis**
       - Are boundary conditions tested?
       - Are error paths tested?
       - Are empty/null inputs tested?

    3. **Test Quality**
       - Do tests test actual logic (not mocks)?
       - Are assertions meaningful?
       - Are tests independent?

    4. **Business Logic**
       - Are calculation formulas verified?
       - Are business rules from {REFERENCE} tested?

    Focus on GAPS not on what's already well-tested.
    We don't want filler tests - only meaningful coverage.

    Categorize findings as Critical/Important/Minor.
    Note any NEW gaps not in previous iterations.

Update Review Document: Append findings to _test-review.md:

markdown

## Iteration N

### New Coverage Gaps
- [Critical] Function X has no tests - handles Y logic
- [Important] Edge case Z not covered in test_foo
- [Minor] Could add test for rare path W

### Test Quality Issues
[Any issues with existing tests]

### Coverage Assessment
[Areas reviewed / Areas remaining]

Commit Review Only:

bash

git add {TARGET_DIR}/_test-review.md
git commit -m "review(test): iteration N findings for {TARGET}"

Quality Gate: Exit when no new gaps found for 1 iteration (review is comprehensive).

Step 5: Finalize Review Document

Update _test-review.md with summary:

markdown

## Review Summary

**Status:** Ready for User Review
**Iterations:** N
**Total Gaps:** X Critical, Y Important, Z Minor

### All Coverage Gaps (Consolidated)

#### Critical (Missing tests for core logic)
1. [ ] Gap description - What test to add

#### Important (Edge cases / error paths)
1. [ ] Gap description - What test to add

#### Minor (Nice to have)
1. [ ] Gap description - What test to add

### Test Quality Issues
- [ ] Issue description - Suggested improvement

### Coverage Assessment
[Sparse / Adequate / Comprehensive]

Commit:

bash

git add {TARGET_DIR}/_test-review.md
git commit -m "review(test): complete findings for {TARGET}"

Step 6: Present Review for Approval

Inform user:

Test coverage review complete.

Please review {TARGET_DIR}/_test-review.md for findings.

After your review, let me know:

•Which tests to add

•Which gaps to skip (acceptable risk)

•Any questions about coverage

STOP and wait for user direction.

Phase 2: Add Approved Tests

Only proceed after user approval.

Step 7: Add Approved Tests

For each user-approved gap:

•Write the test following TDD principles
•Check the gap as addressed in _test-review.md: [x]

Step 8: Run Tests

bash

npm run test:backend

Verify:

•All new tests pass
•No existing tests broken
•Test count increased as expected

Step 9: Commit Changes

bash

git add src-tauri/src/*_tests.rs
git commit -m "test: add coverage for {TARGET}

Added:
- [list of new tests]"

Step 10: Final Assessment

Update _test-review.md:

markdown

## Resolution

**Tests Added:** N
**Gaps Skipped:** M (user decision)
**Final Test Count:** X (was Y)
**Status:** Complete

### Added Tests
- test_foo: covers [what]
- test_bar: covers [what]

### Skipped Gaps
- Gap X: [user's reason - acceptable risk]

Domain-Specific Checklist

Review should verify:

• Core business logic has tests
• Edge cases covered (empty, null, boundary)
• Error paths tested
• No tests that only test mocks
• Tests are independent (can run in any order)
• Tests have meaningful assertions

Example

code

User: /test-review src-tauri/src/calculations.rs against DECISIONS.md

Claude: [Executes Phase 1 - analyzes coverage, creates _test-review.md, iterates until comprehensive]
Claude: Test coverage review complete. Please review _test-review.md for findings.

User: Add Critical and Important tests. Skip Minor - we're time constrained.

Claude: [Executes Phase 2 - adds approved tests, runs tests, commits]