# Tdd

> Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration tests.

- Skill: `toverux/tdd` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 4 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add toverux/tdd`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/toverux/tdd/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Integrations & APIs
- Author: toverux (https://skillmd.com/u/toverux)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/toverux/tdd

---


# Test-Driven Development

TDD is the red → green loop. This skill is the reference that makes that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, the anti-patterns, and the rules of the loop. Every section applies on every cycle — consult them before and during the loop, not after.

Match test names and interface vocabulary to the project's domain glossary (the `AGENTS.md` glossary section, or `CONCEPTS.md` if the project has one).
Working from a spec that folded in the standing decisions — `/spec` step 2 does, flagging what conflicts — take those decisions as read.
Otherwise, where the loop config enables the ADR store, read the ADRs bearing on the area you are touching before naming tests and interfaces, so a seam or an interface does not re-litigate a decision already made.
The loop config is `docs/agents/cantrips-loop.md`; when that doc is absent, the ADR store is off.

## What a good test is

Tests verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't. A good test reads like a specification — "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists — and survives refactors because it doesn't care about internal structure.

See [tests.md](tests.md) for examples and [mocking.md](mocking.md) for mocking guidelines.

## Seams — where tests go

A **seam** is the public boundary you test at: the interface where you observe behavior without reaching inside (full vocabulary: `/codebase-design`). Tests live at seams, never against internals.

**Test only at agreed seams.** Seams the user approved in the spec (via `/spec`) are already agreed — test at them without re-asking. Anywhere else, write down the seams under test and confirm them with the user before writing any test. You can't test everything — agreeing the seams up front is how testing effort lands on the critical paths and complex logic instead of every edge case.

**Bug fixes start red on the bug.**
The first test is a failing repro of the bug; the fix turns it green.
Whether a truly trivial fix warrants a test at all is judgment — defer to your general coding guidelines.

## Anti-patterns

- **Implementation-coupled** — mocks internal collaborators, tests private methods, or verifies through a side channel (querying the database instead of using the interface). The tell: the test breaks when you refactor but behavior hasn't changed.
- **Tautological** — the assertion recomputes the expected value the way the code does (`expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b)`, a snapshot derived by hand the same way, a constant asserted equal to itself), so it passes by construction and can never disagree with the code. Expected values must come from an independent source of truth — a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec.
- **Horizontal slicing** — writing all tests first, then all implementation. Bulk tests verify _imagined_ behavior: you test the _shape_ of things rather than user-facing behavior, the tests go insensitive to real changes, and you commit to test structure before understanding the implementation. Work in **vertical slices** instead — one test → one implementation → repeat, each test a **tracer bullet** that responds to what the last cycle taught you.

## Rules of the loop

- **Red before green.** Write the failing test first, then only enough code to pass it. Don't anticipate future tests or add speculative features.
- **One slice at a time.** One seam, one test, one minimal implementation per cycle.
- **Refactoring is not part of the loop.** It belongs to the review tail — `/simplify` and `/review-gate`, after implementation finishes — not the red → green cycle.