brooks-harness
Maintenance orchestrator for the brooks-lint plugin itself. Runs a sequential subagent pipeline — author → eval → QA →…
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness,
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-test --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-test -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-test -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-test -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-test -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-test -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-test -a windsurf -y
name: brooks-test description: > Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow execution, poor readability. Triggers when: user asks about test quality, shares test files for review, or expresses frustration: "tests keep breaking whenever I change anything", "our tests take forever", "tests pass but bugs still reach production", or "we have too many mocks". Do NOT trigger for: writing new tests from scratch (use the regular test-writing workflow) or testing framework/syntax questions — this skill reviews an existing suite for structural quality problems, not individual test authoring. metadata: opencode/slash: "true"
Read in order:
1. `../_shared/common.md` — Iron Law, Project Config, Report Template, Health Score 2. `../_shared/source-coverage.md` — book coverage, exceptions, tradeoffs 3. `../_shared/test-decay-risks.md` — test-space symptom definitions and sources 4. `test-guide.md` (this directory) — the test quality review framework
**Scope:** if the user did not share test files or point to a test directory, apply Auto Scope Detection (`../_shared/common.md`) first.
1. Build the test suite map (guide's "Before You Start" section) 2. Scan for each test decay risk in the order specified (Steps 1–4 of the guide) 3. Apply the Iron Law and output using the Report Template (Step 5 of the guide)
**Mode line in report:** `Test Quality Review`
Portable AI code quality reviews for Codex, Cursor, Copilot and other coding agents: six Agent Skills for architecture, technical debt, tests and remediation.
Maintenance orchestrator for the brooks-lint plugin itself. Runs a sequential subagent pipeline — author → eval → QA →…
Scaffold a new brooks-lint analysis skill so it passes `npm run validate` and `npm run evals` on the first try — generates…
Cut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every…
Architecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase,…
Tech debt assessment that identifies, classifies, and prioritizes maintainability problems — helping teams build a refactoring…
Combined codebase health dashboard that scores a project across all four quality dimensions — PR quality, architecture, tech…
Performs AI-powered code review on Git changes using the `ocr` CLI from alibaba/open-code-review. Use when the user asks to…
Address all valid review comments on a PR for the current branch in the streamlit/streamlit repo. Covers both inline review…
Build or update the code review knowledge graph. Run this first to initialise, or let hooks keep it updated automatically.
Maps the `hunkdiff/extension` authoring surface for Hunk, the terminal diff viewer — hiding or reordering reviewed files, docked…