How do I install the Test Case Reviewer skill?

Run npx skillmds add naodeng/test-case-reviewer in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Test Case Reviewer safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. Capability flags: executes scripts. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Test Case Reviewer?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Test Case Reviewer free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Test Case Reviewer?

naodeng (@naodeng) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Test Case Reviewer by naodeng — Agent Skill

Name: Test Case Reviewer
Rating: 4.2 (5 reviews)
Author: naodeng

File contents

Test Case Review

Chinese version： See the corresponding Chinese skill.

When to Use

Need help with test case reviewer in a real project context.
Need an output that can be used directly for execution, review, or follow-up.

Workflow

Read and follow the main prompt listed under Progressive disclosure (coverage, structure, quality bar).
Add only project context that changes the result: scope, environment, constraints, risks, dependencies, expected deliverable.
If input is incomplete, return a usable first draft and explicitly mark assumptions and gaps.
Default to Markdown; switch formats only when the user asks.

Core Constraints

Prioritize by risk / business impact — do not treat everything equally.
Separate confirmed facts from current assumptions.
Do not invent endpoints, fields, environments, or root causes the user did not provide.
Keep output executable: concrete scenarios, clear priority, clear next steps.

Progressive Disclosure

Before producing output, read and follow prompts/test-case-reviewer.md (minimum coverage, output structure, quality bar).
When Excel/CSV/JSON/Word is requested: read output-formats.md and honor the format.
When a ready-made template fits: use matching files under output-templates/.
For format conversion or helper checks: prefer existing scripts/ over reinventing.
For evaluating/regressing this skill: use evals/ with skill-up.

Pre-delivery Checklist

Followed the main prompt's output structure
Minimum coverage focus: coverage gaps, missing positive scenarios, missing negative scenarios, missing boundary scenarios, traceability to requirements, step clarity, expected result quality, data quality, ... (details in main prompt)
Covered the minimum checklist, or explained omissions
High-risk items have explicit priority
Did not invent details the user did not provide
Assumptions and gaps are marked

Common Pitfalls

Do not pretend completeness when scope/context is missing.
Do not treat every item as equally important.
Do not skip assumptions and information gaps.
Do not dump generic theory unrelated to the current toolchain.

---name: test-case-reviewerdescription: Use this skill when you need to review test cases for completeness, clarity, maintainability, and missing scenarios; triggers include test case review and test case QA.--- # Test Case Review **Chinese version：** See the corresponding Chinese skill. ## When to Use - Need help with test case reviewer in a real project context. - Need an output that can be used directly for execution, review, or follow-up. ## Workflow 1. Read and follow the main prompt listed under Progressive disclosure (coverage, structure, quality bar). 2. Add only project context that changes the result: scope, environment, constraints, risks, dependencies, expected deliverable. 3. If input is incomplete, return a usable first draft and explicitly mark assumptions and gaps. 4. Default to Markdown; switch formats only when the user asks. ## Core Constraints - Prioritize by risk / business impact — do not treat everything equally. - Separate confirmed facts from current assumptions. - Do not invent endpoints, fields, environments, or root causes the user did not provide. - Keep output executable: concrete scenarios, clear priority, clear next steps. ## Progressive Disclosure - Before producing output, read and follow `prompts/test-case-reviewer.md` (minimum coverage, output structure, quality bar). - When Excel/CSV/JSON/Word is requested: read `output-formats.md` and honor the format. - When a ready-made template fits: use matching files under `output-templates/`. - For format conversion or helper checks: prefer existing `scripts/` over reinventing. - For evaluating/regressing this skill: use `evals/` with skill-up. ## Pre-delivery Checklist - [ ] Followed the main prompt's output structure - [ ] Minimum coverage focus: coverage gaps, missing positive scenarios, missing negative scenarios, missing boundary scenarios, traceability to requirements, step clarity, expected result quality, data quality, ... (details in main prompt) - [ ] Covered the minimum checklist, or explained omissions - [ ] High-risk items have explicit priority - [ ] Did not invent details the user did not provide - [ ] Assumptions and gaps are marked ## Common Pitfalls - Do not pretend completeness when scope/context is missing. - Do not treat every item as equally important. - Do not skip assumptions and information gaps. - Do not dump generic theory unrelated to the current toolchain.

Frequently asked questions