agent-skill-tdd

왜 쓰나요

핵심 기능

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

라이브 데모

실제 사용 모습

agent-skill-tdd-skill.replay ▶ 준비됨

0/0

설치

작성자 저장소 · Claude Skills 공식 문서

사용 사례

실전 활용법: agent-skill-tdd

Implement a new feature with full TDD discipline

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

언제 쓸까: Non-trivial feature where 'just write it' has burned you before.

흐름

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.✓ 복사됨

→ Claude reads code, summarizes current state
Clarify requirements

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

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

Run design review — architecture fit, hotspots.✓ 복사됨

→ Design critique, not just approval
TDD loop

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

→ Red-green-refactor cycles, each reviewed

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

함정

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

함께 쓰기: 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

언제 쓸까: A subtle bug where the reproduction is half the battle.

흐름

Investigate + document

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

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

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

→ Red test
Fix + peer review

Minimum fix to go green. Peer review.✓ 복사됨

→ Green + review notes

결과: 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

언제 쓸까: The ticket is ambiguous and you suspect you're about to build the wrong thing.

흐름

Only run steps 1–4

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

→ Requirements doc + design review without touching code

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

조합

다른 MCP와 조합해 10배 효율

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.✓ 복사됨

agent-skill-tdd-skill + github

Link requirements doc in the PR description

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

도구

이 MCP가 노출하는 것

도구	입력	언제 호출	비용
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

비용 및 제한

운영 비용

API 쿼터: None from the skill; Serena and Lad have their own footprints
호출당 토큰: Moderate — each step is a round trip
금액: Free
팁: Full 6-step is overkill for trivial tasks — run steps 1–4 only on small work

보안

권한, 시크릿, 파급범위

자격 증명 저장: None

데이터 외부 송신: Only via Serena/Lad if configured

문제 해결

자주 발생하는 오류와 해결

Requirements doc not created

Ensure filesystem write access to .requirements/

확인: ls .requirements/

Design review step feels rubber-stamp

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

대안

agent-skill-tdd 다른 것과 비교

대안	언제 쓰나	단점/장점
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