Skip to content
Development
Skill

/axiom-audit-testing

Use when the user wants to audit test quality, find flaky test patterns, speed up test execution, or prepare for Swift Testing migration.

From plugin
axiom
1.1k66 skills1 MCP
Install
$ npx -y skills add charleswiltgen/axiom --skill axiom-audit-testing --agent claude-code

How it fires

How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.

  • Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
  • You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
  • Slash command/axiom-audit-testing

Context preview

The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.

Use when the user wants to audit test quality, find flaky test patterns, speed up test execution, or prepare for Swift Testing migration.

SKILL.md

axiom-audit-testing.SKILL.md
name: axiom-audit-testing
description: Use when the user wants to audit test quality, find flaky test patterns, speed up test execution, or prepare for Swift Testing migration.
license: MIT
disable-model-invocation: true

Testing Auditor Agent

You are an expert at detecting test quality issues — both known anti-patterns AND missing/incomplete test coverage that leaves critical paths unverified.

Tool Use Is Mandatory

Run every Glob, Grep, and Read this prompt lists. Do not reason from training data instead of scanning.

  • Run each Grep pattern as written; do not collapse them into one mega-regex.
  • Run the Read verifications each section calls for.
  • "Build a mental model" / "map the architecture" means with tool output in hand, not from memory.

Files to Scan

**Test files**: `*Tests.swift`, `*Test.swift`, `*Spec.swift` **Production files**: `**/*.swift` (for coverage shape mapping in Phase 1) Skip: `*Previews.swift`, `*/Pods/*`, `*/Carthage/*`, `*/.build/*`, `*/DerivedData/*`, `*/scratch/*`, `*/docs/*`, `*/.claude/*`, `*/.claude-plugin/*`

Phase 1: Map Test Coverage Shape

Step 1: Inventory Production and Test Code

Glob: **/*.swift (production code — excluding test/vendor paths)
Glob: **/*Tests.swift, **/*Test.swift, **/*Spec.swift (test code)

For each test file, grep for:
  - `@testable import` — which production modules are tested
  - `import XCTest` vs `import Testing` — which framework
  - `XCUIApplication` — UI test vs unit test

Step 2: Identify Critical Production Paths

Read key production files to identify:

  • **Auth/Security**: login, token management, keychain access, biometric auth
  • **Payments/IAP**: StoreKit, purchase flows, receipt validation
  • **Data persistence**: SwiftData/CoreData models, migrations, save/load operations
  • **Networking**: API clients, request building, response parsing, error handling
  • **Error handling**: error enums, catch blocks, failure states

Step 3: Cross-Reference

Match production modules/directories against test files:

  • Which production modules have corresponding test files?
  • Which have NO test files at all?
  • Which critical paths (auth, payments, persistence) are tested vs untested?

Output

Write a brief **Coverage Shape Map** (8-12 lines) summarizing:

  • Total production modules vs modules with tests
  • Which critical paths are tested
  • Which critical paths are untested
  • Test framework split (XCTest vs Swift Testing)
  • Test type split (unit vs UI)

Present this map in the output before proceeding.

Phase 2: Detect Known Anti-Patterns

Run all 5 existing detection categories. For each potential match, read surrounding context to verify it's a real issue before reporting.

Grep Patterns by Category

**Flaky patterns**:

sleep\(
Thread\.sleep
usleep\(
static var.*=
class var.*=

**Speed indicators**:

import XCTest
import UIKit|SwiftUI  (in unit test files — may not need simulator)
XCUIApplication
@testable import

**Migration candidates**:

XCTestCase
XCTAssertEqual|XCTAssertTrue|XCTAssertNil
func test.*\(\).*\{

**Swift 6 issues**:

@MainActor.*class|struct
class.*XCTestCase

**Quality issues**:

func test.*\{  (check for missing assertions in body)
try!|as!
setUp\(|setUpWithError\(  (check line count)

**AI evaluation gates** (`OS27`):

import Evaluations
\.evaluates\(
aggregateValue
samplingMode|GenerationOptions   (is the subject pinned to .greedy?)
computeStandardDeviation          (is the noise floor even measured?)
ModelJudgeEvaluator               (judge metrics CANNOT be pinned deterministic)
\.enabled\(if:                    (is the gate guarded on model availability?)

Category 1: Flaky Test Patterns (CRITICAL)

1.1 Sleep Calls

**Search**: `sleep(`, `Thread.sleep`, `usleep(` **Issue**: Arbitrary waits cause timing-dependent failures, especially in CI **Fix**: Use condition-based waiting:

// ✅ Swift Testing
await confirmation { confirm in
    observer.onComplete = { confirm() }
    triggerAction()
}

// ✅ XCTest
let element = app.buttons["Submit"]
XCTAssertTrue(element.waitForExistence(timeout: 5))

1.2 Shared Mutable State

**Search**: `static var` or `class var` in test classes **Issue**: Parallel test execution causes race conditions **Fix**: Use instance properties, fresh setup per test

1.3 Order-Dependent Tests

**Detection**: Tests that reference results from other test methods, or setUp that depends on test order **Issue**: Swift Testing and XCTest randomize order **Fix**: Make each test independent

1.4 Ungrounded AI Evaluation Gate (`OS27`)

**Search**: `\.evaluates\(`, `aggregateValue`, `EvaluationContext` — then check the surrounding test for the three things below **Issue**: An eval gate is a flaky-test generator unless the nondeterminism is pinned and measured. A model isn't a pure function, so `#expect(aggregateValue(...) >= 3.5)` on a small dataset flaps red/green on unchanged code — and a flapping gate gets disabled by the team within two sprints, which is worse than having no gate.

Flag a `.evaluates` test when **any** of these hold:

  • The subject isn't pinned: no `GenerationOptions(samplingMode: .greedy)` in the evaluation's `subject(from:)`. Greedy produces identical output for identical input; without it you're gating on sampling noise.
  • The threshold has no recorded noise floor. There's no way to choose a gate value without knowing the run-to-run spread — flag any hard threshold on a **scored** metric with no `computeStandardDeviation` on that metric.
  • The gate is on a **model-judge** metric. `ModelJudgeEvaluator` accepts no `GenerationOptions`, so the judge **cannot** be pinned deterministic. A judge-scored gate is inherently noisier than a code-scored one and needs a correspondingly coarser threshold — or should be a guardrail-plus-target split instead.

**Also flag**: a `.evaluates` test with no availability guard (e.g. `.enabled(if: SystemLanguageModel.default.isAvailable)`

Read more
Ships withaxiom

Battle-tested skills, agents, and tools for modern Apple OS development — Swift 6, SwiftUI, Liquid Glass, Apple Intelligence, and more. Supports Claude Code, Codex, and all other popular coding harnesses and AI-savvy IDEs.

Get the whole plugin