aesthetic-instrument
great_cto's own committed aesthetic — the instrument panel. Dark five-step surface ladder, exactly one accent, two faces divided by MEANING (Geist speaks,…
Coverage-design method for qa-engineer — pyramid ratios per archetype, equivalence/boundary/property case selection, mutation score as the real coverage signal, and a flake-quarantine policy. Turns "coverage is 90%" (a number with no method) into a defensible test plan. Emits
$ npx -y skills add avelikiy/great_cto --skill test-strategy --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/test-strategyContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Coverage-design method for qa-engineer — pyramid ratios per archetype, equivalence/boundary/property case selection, mutation score as the real coverage signal, and a flake-quarantine policy. Turns "coverage is 90%" (a number with no method) into a defensible test plan. Emits
name: test-strategy
description: Coverage-design method for qa-engineer — pyramid ratios per archetype, equivalence/boundary/property case selection, mutation score as the real coverage signal, and a flake-quarantine policy. Turns "coverage is 90%" (a number with no method) into a defensible test plan. Emits TEST-STRATEGY-{slug}.md, which the QA gate checks exists.
when_to_use: |
Apply when:
- qa-engineer is planning tests for a medium/large feature (>1 file, real behaviour risk)
- a coverage % is being reported and you need to know whether it MEANS anything
- deciding what to test (not just measuring what's covered)
Do NOT apply to:
- nano / tiny changes (typo, rename) — overhead exceeds value
- pure docs changes
effort: medium
allowed-tools: Read, Write, Grep, Glob, Bash
paths:
- "tests/**"
- "docs/qa-reports/**"Coverage % is a number with no method. This skill makes the QA plan defensible: **what** to test, **why** that set, and a **real** signal that the tests bite.
qa-engineer emits `docs/qa-reports/TEST-STRATEGY-{slug}.md` capturing the four decisions below; the QA gate checks the file exists for medium/large features.
The right unit:integration:e2e mix depends on where the risk lives.
| Archetype | unit | integration | e2e | why | |-----------|------|-------------|-----|-----| | library / devtools / cli | 80% | 15% | 5% | logic-dense, few I/O seams | | web-app / saas | 60% | 30% | 10% | request→db→render seams dominate | | commerce / fintech / marketplace | 50% | 35% | 15% | money paths need cross-component proof | | data-platform / streaming | 45% | 45% | 10% | correctness lives in pipelines, not units | | ai-system / agent-product | 50% | 20% | 10% + **evals 20%** | behaviour is the contract → eval set (see [[decision-eval]]) |
State the chosen ratio in TEST-STRATEGY and justify any deviation.
Don't enumerate inputs; **partition** them.
Line/branch coverage proves code *ran*, not that a test would *fail* if it broke. **Mutation testing** (Stryker / mutmut / cargo-mutants) flips operators/conditions and checks a test catches it. A "90% covered" module with 30% mutation score has assertion-free tests. Target: mutation score ≥ 60% on changed logic-dense files; report it in TEST-STRATEGY when the change is logic-heavy. Coverage % is the cheap proxy; mutation score is the truth.
A test that fails ~randomly trains the team to ignore red. Policy:
`tests/eval/runner.mjs` — stddev > 0.1 is a flake signal).
# TEST-STRATEGY-{slug}
- Archetype + chosen pyramid ratio (+ justification for any deviation)
- Equivalence classes & boundaries enumerated per changed unit
- Property-based candidates (which logic, which invariants)
- Mutation-score target + result (for logic-dense changes)
- Quarantine list (flaky tests + their tracking bug)Done = the plan answers "why THIS set of tests", not just "how much is covered".
You already have the agent. This is everything around it. great_cto runs Claude Code as a pipeline of 70 specialist agents — an independent model checks each stage before the next builds on it, spending caps refuse rather than warn, and three decisions stay yours: what gets built, how, and whether it ships.
Repo: avelikiy/great_cto
great_cto's own committed aesthetic — the instrument panel. Dark five-step surface ladder, exactly one accent, two faces divided by MEANING (Geist speaks,…
Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that great_cto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect…
Analyze images, websites, and Figma files to extract their design and generate a `design.md` with token system, component inventory, and reconstruction notes.…
Shared review framework that every domain reviewer (pci, oracle, gov, edtech, healthcare, mlops, etc.) MUST follow. Defines the output artifact (TM-{slug}.md),…
Structured idea generation + multi-LLM debate for the product-owner stage. Diverge (generate genuinely different bets), debate (a 4-persona panel on 4 models…
Run the great_cto controlled Codex lifecycle with controller-owned writes, verifier evidence, human gates and optional artifact release.