majiayu000 Review Test Coverage
Analyze code for test coverage gaps. Identify untested functions, missing edge cases, and areas where test quality is insufficient. Return structured findings.
Step 1: Determine the Scope
Determine what to analyze:
- If a specific diff command was provided (e.g.,
git diff --cached), run it to identify changed code that needs coverage analysis. - If a file list or directory was provided, analyze those files directly.
- If neither was provided, default to diffing against the repository's default branch (detect via
gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef --jq '.defaultBranchRef.name').
Step 2: Identify Coverage Gaps
- For each file in scope, skip non-testable code (config, documentation, CI files, SKILL.md files, markdown)
- Search for existing test files covering the target code
- Identify the project's test framework and conventions by reading existing test files
- Analyze each function/module for:
- No test coverage: functions or modules with no corresponding tests
- Missing edge cases: tests exist but miss critical paths (error handling, boundary conditions, empty inputs, concurrent access)
- Risk-level mismatch: high-risk code (auth, data handling, financial logic) with only basic happy-path tests
- Convention gaps: tests not following the project's established testing patterns
Output Format
Return findings as a numbered list. For each finding:
### [P<N>] <title (imperative, <=80 chars)>
**File:** `<file path>` (lines <start>-<end>)
<one paragraph describing the coverage gap and why it matters>
After all findings, add:
## Overall Verdict
**Test Coverage:** <adequate | gaps found>
<1-3 sentence summary>
If nothing needs tests, report that and explain briefly.
Priority Levels
- P0 — Critical code with no tests (auth, data mutation, payment processing)
- P1 — Important code with no tests or high-risk code with only happy-path tests
- P2 — Code with tests but missing significant edge cases
- P3 — Minor coverage gaps or convention mismatches