golang-testing

Engineering Verified
Fluxly profile Facts only: domain, agents, trust score, runtime, permissions and network
Domain
Engineering
Compatible agents
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Cline
  • Codex
  • Windsurf
  • Gemini CLI
  • +20
Trust score
94 / 100 · audit passed
Author / version / license
@xu-xiang · MIT
Token usage
Lean
Setup complexity
Guided setup
External API key
Not required
Operating systems
Linux
Runtime requirements
No special requirements
Permissions
  • Read-only
  • Write / modify
  • Shell exec
Network behavior
Local-only
Install commands
26 variants

Profile is derived at build time from SKILL.md and install vectors. Subject to drift from author intent.

Heads up: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。

Output preview golang-testing.preview
---
name: golang-testing
description: 遵循测试驱动开发(TDD)方法论,编写可靠且易于维护的 Go 测试的全面模式。 RED → 先编写一个失败的测试 GREEN → 编写最少的代码使测试通过 REFACTOR → 在保持测试通过…
category: engineering
runtime: no special runtime
---

# golang-testing output preview

## PART A: Task fit
- Use case: 遵循测试驱动开发(TDD)方法论,编写可靠且易于维护的 Go 测试的全面模式。 RED → 先编写一个失败的测试 GREEN → 编写最少的代码使测试通过 REFACTOR → 在保持测试通过的同时改进代码 REPEAT → 继续处理下一个需求 runs entirely locally. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, Cline and 23 more..
- Inputs: target material, constraints, expected output, and acceptance criteria.
- Evidence boundary: follow “何时激活 / Go 的 TDD 工作流 / 红-绿-重构 (RED-GREEN-REFACTOR) 循环” and do not present inference as author intent.

## PART B: Execution result
- **01** The card summarizes the use case; runtime output centers on “遵循测试驱动开发(TDD)方法论,编写可靠且易于维护的 Go 测试的全面模式。 RED → 先编写一个失败的测试 GREEN → 编写最少的代码使测试通过 REFACTOR → 在保持测试通过的同时改进代码 REPEAT → 继续处理下一个需求 runs entirely locally. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, Cline and 23 more.”.
- **02** When the source has headings, the agent prioritizes “何时激活 / Go 的 TDD 工作流 / 红-绿-重构 (RED-GREEN-REFACTOR) 循环” so the result follows the author’s structure.
- **03** Typical output includes task judgment, concrete steps, required commands or file edits, validation, and follow-up options.
- **04** Risk context follows the fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, run shell commands; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.

## Running Rules
- read files, write/modify files, run shell commands; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding scope.
- Return the result, validation criteria, and next iteration options.
Interpretation is structured for decision-making; original keeps the upstream SKILL.md unchanged.

Decide Fit First

  • Core job: Go 测试模式 (Testing Patterns) 遵循测试驱动开发(TDD)方法论,编写可靠且易于维护的 Go 测试的全面模式。 编写新的 Go 函数或方法时 为现有代码增加测试覆盖率时 为性能关键型代码创建基准测试(Benchmarks)时 为输入验…
  • Best fit: Use it when the task has reusable inputs, steps, and validation criteria rather than a one-off answer.
  • Avoid forcing it: If the source lacks commands, platform support, or external-service evidence, keep those fields unknown instead of guessing.

Design Intent

  • Structure: The skill is organized around “何时激活”, “Go 的 TDD 工作流”, “红-绿-重构 (RED-GREEN-REFACTOR) 循环”, “Go 中的分步 TDD”, showing how the author expects the agent to judge fit, collect context, and produce verifiable output.
  • Trigger evidence: Prioritize the author’s wording around when to use it, what context to collect, and what output shape to produce.
  • Evidence boundary: Author text states facts, repository files prove commands and paths, and Fluxly only adds fit, limits, and usage judgment.

How To Use It

  • Inputs: Provide target material, scope, expected result, forbidden changes, and validation method.
  • Invocation: Name golang-testing directly; if the source includes slash commands, start with the command and then add task context.
  • Validation: Start small and check whether the result follows “何时激活 / Go 的 TDD 工作流 / 红-绿-重构 (RED-GREEN-REFACTOR) 循环” before expanding.

Boundaries And Review

  • Dependencies: It usually needs no extra API key, so start with a small validation task.
  • Permissions: Declared permissions include read / write / shell-exec; ask the agent to state file, command, and rollback boundaries before acting.
  • Quality bar: A useful result names the deliverable, evidence, and next action. Generic prose means the task needs tighter context.

Discussion

Powered by GitHub Discussions. Sign in with GitHub to comment, react, or subscribe.