AI-Generated Test Review
Determine whether AI-generated tests prove real behavior instead of merely raising coverage or producing green builds.
When to Use
- Reviewing, changing, or accepting AI-generated unit, functional, API, or E2E tests.
- A test passes but its assertions, isolation, data, or coverage value is doubtful.
Workflow
- Inventory test types and files actually present in scope: unit, functional test, API, E2E, or a combination. Review only discovered or user-specified types.
- Establish the behavior, risk, and available requirement or implementation evidence. Mark missing evidence; do not invent findings.
- Read
prompts/review-test.mdand report actionable findings by severity, tied to a test, risk, and repair direction. - Load rules only for discovered layers: unit, functional test, API, or E2E. Load more than one only for cross-layer concerns; do not perform a global review just because multiple rule files exist.
- Separate merge-blocking faults from improvements; do not call an effective test defective because of style preference.
Core Constraints
- Judge observable behavior, failure signals, and risk coverage—not line coverage, test names, or mock-call counts alone.
- When a broken implementation could still pass, state the smallest break and the assertion needed to catch it.
- Never recommend deleting assertions, swallowing errors, loosening timeouts, or changing production behavior merely to obtain green tests.
- Do not expose credentials, personal data, or production write operations in tests, logs, or examples.
Progressive Disclosure
- Always read
prompts/review-test.mdbefore reviewing; its test-type routing precedes per-test review. - For fake tests, excessive mocks, or ineffective assertions, read
references/fake-test-patterns.md. - Read
references/unit-test-rules.md,references/functional-test-rules.md,references/api-test-rules.md, orreferences/e2e-test-rules.mdfor the applicable layer. - Read related material under
examples/good/orexamples/bad/when an example is useful.
Pre-delivery Checklist
- States scope, evidence, and open questions
- Ranks findings and includes location, impact, and repair direction
- Reviews real assertions, negative paths, boundaries, isolation, and repeatability
- Does not present speculation as fact