agent-skill-tdd — Installer & Démo en direct

Pourquoi l'utiliser

Fonctionnalités clés

6-step workflow: Serena -> Investigate -> Clarify -> Document -> Design Review -> TDD
Timestamped .requirements/ docs per task
Explicit requirements confirmation before code
Architecture review via Lad MCP before implementation
Per-change peer review on every edit
Agent-agnostic — Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Windsurf, Antigravity

Démo en direct

Aperçu en pratique

agent-skill-tdd-skill.replay ▶ prêt

0/0

Installation

Dépôt de l’auteur · Documentation officielle des Skills Claude

Cas d'usage

Usages concrets : agent-skill-tdd

Implement a new feature with full TDD discipline

👤 Teams where AI coders jump to implementation and miss requirements ⏱ ~120 min intermediate

Quand l'utiliser : Non-trivial feature where 'just write it' has burned you before.

Déroulement

Kick off with the skill

Use agent-skill-tdd. I want to add a 'saved searches' feature. Start from step 1 — activate Serena and investigate.✓ Copié

→ Claude reads code, summarizes current state
Clarify requirements

Confirm what I just said maps to these acceptance criteria — don't code yet.✓ Copié

→ Back-and-forth until confirmed; .requirements/ file saved
Design review via Lad

Run design review — architecture fit, hotspots.✓ Copié

→ Design critique, not just approval
TDD loop

Now begin TDD — write a failing test, minimum code to pass, refactor. Peer review each step.✓ Copié

→ Red-green-refactor cycles, each reviewed

Résultat : Feature shipped with tests, requirements history, and design rationale preserved.

Pièges

Skipping clarify to 'save time' — That's where most AI coding value is lost — hold the line

Combiner avec : filesystem · github

Fix a bug after writing down what correct behavior should be

👤 Devs tired of AI 'fixes' that break other paths ⏱ ~60 min intermediate

Quand l'utiliser : A subtle bug where the reproduction is half the battle.

Déroulement

Investigate + document

Use agent-skill-tdd bug mode. Symptom: <description>. Write the reproduction + expected behavior to .requirements/ first.✓ Copié

→ Timestamped doc with As-Is and To-Be
Write failing test

Test that expresses the expected behavior — currently failing.✓ Copié

→ Red test
Fix + peer review

Minimum fix to go green. Peer review.✓ Copié

→ Green + review notes

Résultat : A bug fix with a test preventing regression.

Stop before implementing — validate you understand the spec

👤 Teams where spec-misreading causes rework ⏱ ~30 min beginner

Quand l'utiliser : The ticket is ambiguous and you suspect you're about to build the wrong thing.

Déroulement

Only run steps 1–4

Use agent-skill-tdd — investigate + clarify + document + design review. Stop before coding.✓ Copié

→ Requirements doc + design review without touching code

Résultat : You either discover you misread the ticket or greenlight with confidence.

Combinaisons

Associez-le à d'autres MCPs pour un effet X10

agent-skill-tdd-skill + filesystem

Keep .requirements/ in the repo for future agents to read

Commit .requirements/ to git so the next session has context.✓ Copié

agent-skill-tdd-skill + github

Link requirements doc in the PR description

When opening the PR, paste the .requirements/ file path in the description.✓ Copié

Outils

Ce que ce MCP expose

Outil	Entrées	Quand appeler	Coût
activate_serena	repo path	Step 1	0 — local
investigate	task description	Step 2	0
clarify	task, user answers	Step 3	0
document_requirements	confirmed requirements	Step 4	0
design_review	requirements + repo	Step 5	0
tdd_cycle	requirements	Step 6	0

Coût et limites

Coût d'exécution

Quota d'API: None from the skill; Serena and Lad have their own footprints
Tokens par appel: Moderate — each step is a round trip
Monétaire: Free
Astuce: Full 6-step is overkill for trivial tasks — run steps 1–4 only on small work

Sécurité

Permissions, secrets, portée

Stockage des identifiants : None

Sortie de données : Only via Serena/Lad if configured

Dépannage

Erreurs courantes et correctifs

Requirements doc not created

Ensure filesystem write access to .requirements/

Vérifier : ls .requirements/

Design review step feels rubber-stamp

Force an adversarial framing: 'what's the strongest objection to this design?'

Alternatives

agent-skill-tdd vs autres

Alternative	Quand l'utiliser	Compromis
claude-gpt-workflow	You want cross-model review instead of self-TDD discipline	Higher API cost
planning-with-files-skill	You want persistence across sessions but less TDD rigor	No test-first enforcement

Plus

Ressources

📖 Lire le README officiel sur GitHub

🐙 Voir les issues ouvertes

🔍 Parcourir les 400+ serveurs MCP et Skills