Skip to content
Development
Skill

/nw-tdd-review-enforcement

Test design mandate enforcement, test budget validation, TDD phase validation (3-phase canon per ADR-025), and external validity checks for the software crafter reviewer

From plugin
nwave
591200 skills34 agents27 commands
Install
$ npx -y skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-tdd-review-enforcement --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/nw-tdd-review-enforcement

Context preview

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

Test design mandate enforcement, test budget validation, TDD phase validation (3-phase canon per ADR-025), and external validity checks for the software crafter reviewer

SKILL.md

nw-tdd-review-enforcement.SKILL.md
name: nw-tdd-review-enforcement
description: Test design mandate enforcement, test budget validation, TDD phase validation (3-phase canon per ADR-025), and external validity checks for the software crafter reviewer
user-invocable: false
disable-model-invocation: true

TDD Review Enforcement

Domain knowledge for reviewing TDD implementations against 5 test design mandates, test budget, TDD phase compliance (3-phase canon per ADR-025), and external validity.

---

5 Test Design Mandates

Mandate 1: Observable Behavioral Outcomes

All assertions validate observable outcomes, never internal structure.

Observable: return values from driving ports | state changes via queries | side effects at driven port boundaries | exceptions from public API | business invariants

Violations: asserting private fields | verifying internal method call order | inspecting intermediate calculations | checking internal class instantiation

Severity: Blocker. Rewrite to assert observable outcomes only.

Mandate 2: No Domain Layer Unit Tests

Zero unit tests of domain entities/value objects/services directly. Test indirectly through application service (driving port) tests.

Violations: imports domain entity (Order, Customer) | instantiates value object (Money, Email) | invokes domain service method

Exception: complex standalone algorithm with stable public interface (rare). Severity: Blocker. Delete domain tests, add application service test.

Mandate 3: Test Through Driving Ports

All unit tests enter through driving ports (application services, controllers, CLI handlers, event handlers). Never internal classes.

Detection: grep for internal imports (`from domain.entity`, `from internal.validator`). Severity: Blocker. Rewrite through driving port.

Mandate 4: Integration Tests for Adapters

Adapters have integration tests with real infrastructure (testcontainers, test servers). No mocked unit tests.

Violations: mocking IDbConnection | mocking SMTP client | stubs instead of real infrastructure Acceptable: in-memory implementations if behavior-complete. Severity: Blocker. Convert to integration test.

Mandate 5: Parametrized Input Variations

Input variations of same behavior use parametrized tests, not duplicates.

Violations: test_valid_email_1/test_valid_email_2 | copy-pasted tests with only inputs changed Severity: High. Consolidate into @pytest.mark.parametrize.

---

Test Budget Validation

Formula: `max_unit_tests = 2 x number_of_distinct_behaviors`

A behavior = ONE observable outcome from a driving port action. Edge cases of same behavior = ONE (use parametrized).

Counting Rules

One behavior: happy path for one operation | error handling for one error type | validation for one rule Not a behavior: testing internal class | same behavior different inputs | testing getters/setters | testing framework code

Enforcement Steps

1. Count distinct behaviors in AC | 2. Calculate `budget = 2 x count` 3. Count actual test methods (parametrized cases don't add) | 4. Pass: actual <= budget. Fail: actual > budget (Blocker)

Example Finding

TEST BUDGET VALIDATION: FAILED

Acceptance Criteria Analysis:
- "User can register with valid email" = 1 behavior
- "Invalid email format rejected" = 1 behavior
- "Duplicate email rejected" = 1 behavior

Budget: 3 behaviors x 2 = 6 unit tests maximum
Actual: 14 unit tests

Violations:
1. Budget exceeded: 14 > 6 (Blocker)
2. Internal class testing: test_user_validator.py tests UserValidator directly (Blocker)
3. Parameterization missing: 5 separate tests for valid email variations

Required: delete internal tests, consolidate via parametrize, re-submit

---

TDD Phase Validation (3-phase canon, ADR-025)

Verify TDD phases in execution-log.json. **Current canonical (ADR-025, 2026-05-07): 3-phase cycle — RED → GREEN → COMMIT.** RED absorbs the legacy PREPARE / RED_ACCEPTANCE / RED_UNIT phases — it unskips the AT scaffold authored by DISTILL, verifies fail-for-right-reason, and writes PBT unit tests ONLY when the AT requires them to reach GREEN.

**Legacy 5-phase contract (ADR-024 era)**: PREPARE / RED_ACCEPTANCE / RED_UNIT / GREEN / COMMIT — preserved for audit-log replay of pre-2026-05-07 commits. Existing execution-log.json files using the 5-phase contract remain valid; the gates below apply equivalently to merged phases under the 3-phase canon.

Phase Checks

  • Completeness: all phases present per the schema version in use (Blocker if missing) | Outcomes: all PASS (Blocker if FAIL)
  • Sequential execution: correct order by timestamps | Test discipline: 100% green after GREEN, COMMIT

Quality Gates

| Gate | Description | Phase (3-phase canon) | Legacy phase (5-phase) | |------|-------------|-----------------------|------------------------| | G1 | Exactly one acceptance test active | RED | PREPARE | | G2 | Acceptance test fails for valid reason | RED | RED_ACCEPTANCE | | G3 | Unit test fails on assertion (when authored) | RED | RED_UNIT | | G4 | No mocks inside hexagon | RED | RED_UNIT | | G5 | Business language in tests | GREEN | GREEN | | G6 | All tests green | GREEN | GREEN | | G7 | 100% passing before commit | COMMIT | COMMIT | | G8 | Test count within budget | RED | RED_UNIT | | G9 | No test modifications to accommodate implementation | GREEN | GREEN |

Gates G2, G4, G7, G8, G9 are Blockers if not verified.

Note: Review/refactoring quality verified at deliver-level Phase 4 (Adversarial Review).

Walking Skeleton Override

When `is_walking_skeleton: true`: don't flag missing unit tests | verify exactly one E2E test | thinnest slice OK (hardcoded values) | unit-test authoring inside RED may be skipped (3-phase canon) or RED_UNIT/GREEN entries SKIPPED with "NOT_APPLICABLE: walking skeleton" (5-phase legacy logs).

---

External Validity Check

Verify features are invocable through entry points, not just existing in code.

Question: "If I follow these steps, will the feature WORK or just EXIST?"

Criteria

1. Ac

Read more
Ships withnwave

AI agents that guide you from idea to working code, with human judgment at every gate. nWave runs inside Claude Code. It breaks feature delivery into seven waves (discover, diverge, discuss, design, devops, distill, deliver).

Get the whole plugin