测试助手
- 作者仓库星标 1,012
- 叉子 98
- 作者更新于 2026年4月16日 02:05
- 作者仓库 dotnet-skills
- 领域
- 通用
- 兼容 Agent
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- 信任分
- 88 / 100 · 社区维护
- 作者 / 版本 / 许可
- @Aaronontheweb · 未声明 license
- Token 消耗评级
- 低消耗
- 接入复杂程度
- 即装即用
- 是否需要外部 API Key
- 不需要
- 兼容的系统
- 未声明(默认跨平台)
- 底层运行要求
- 无特殊要求
- 文件与系统权限
-
- 只读
- 允许写入 / 修改
- 读取环境变量
- 网络行为
- 仅限本地
- 安装命令数
- 26 条
档案由构建时根据 SKILL.md 与安装命令自动衍生,可能与作者实际意图存在差异。
需要注意: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: snapshot-testing
description: Use Verify for snapshot testing in .NET. Approve API surfaces, HTTP responses, rendered emails…
category: 通用
runtime: 无特殊运行时
---
# snapshot-testing 输出预览
## PART A: 任务判断
- 适用问题:通用任务拆解、检查和交付。
- 输入要求:目标材料、限制条件、期望输出和验收方式。
- 证据边界:围绕“When to Use This Skill / What is Snapshot Testing? / Installation”读取原文规则,不把推断写成作者承诺。
## PART B: 执行结果
- **01** 任务判断:确认你的需求是否属于通用任务拆解、检查和交付,并标出输入、限制和预期结果。
- **02** 执行计划:优先按“When to Use This Skill / What is Snapshot Testing? / Installation”拆成步骤,说明每一步会读取什么、修改什么、产出什么。
- **03** 交付结果:给出可复制的命令、文件改动、检查清单或内容草稿,并说明如何继续迭代。
- **04** 风险边界:结合 读取文件、写入/修改文件、读取环境变量、主要在本地完成、通常不需要额外 API Key 给出执行前确认项。
## Running Rules
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件、读取环境变量;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先小样例验证,再放大到真实任务。
- 交付时同时给结果、检查口径和下一步迭代建议。 原文没有稳定的斜杠命令要求。安装验证后通常全局生效,直接在对话里点名这个 Skill 并描述任务即可。
告诉 Agent 目标文件或材料、期望结果、不可改范围、是否允许联网或执行命令。本 Skill 的权限画像是:读取文件、写入/修改文件、读取环境变量。
先用一个小任务确认它会围绕“When to Use This Skill / What is Snapshot Testing? / Installation”工作;涉及文件或命令时,先看 diff、日志、预览或测试结果。
检查最终产物是否包含明确结果、必要证据和下一步动作;如果输出泛泛而谈,就补充输入、边界和验收标准后重跑。
---
name: snapshot-testing
description: Use Verify for snapshot testing in .NET. Approve API surfaces, HTTP responses, rendered emails…
category: 通用
source: Aaronontheweb/dotnet-skills
---
# snapshot-testing
## 什么时候使用
- 减少 .NET 输出变更漏检,用快照基线锁定行为 适合处理通用任务拆解、检查、交付和复盘,核心价值是把输入、判断、执行、验证和交付边界固定下来,避免 Agent 泛泛回答。 把任务拆成可执行、可检查、可继续迭代的步骤;通常不需要额外 A…
- 面向通用任务拆解、检查和交付,优先处理能明确输入、步骤和验收标准的工作。
## 需要提供什么
- 目标材料、目录范围、期望结果和不可改动内容。
- 是否允许联网、执行命令、读写文件或调用外部服务。
## 执行规则
- 围绕「When to Use This Skill / What is Snapshot Testing? / Installation」组织步骤,不把推断写成作者事实。
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件、读取环境变量;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先跑小样例,确认结果可检查后再扩大任务范围。
## 输出要求
- 给出最终产物、关键证据、验证方式和下一步动作。
- 信息不足时标记 unknown,不编造命令、平台或依赖。 作者原文负责流程事实;仓库文件负责来源和命令;流狐只补充适用场景、限制和质量判断。
skill "snapshot-testing" {
输入层 -> 用户目标 + 目标文件 + 禁止范围 + 验收标准
上下文层 -> When to Use This Skill / What is Snapshot Testing? / Installation
规则层 -> SKILL.md 触发条件 / 执行顺序 / 输出格式
运行层 -> 无特殊运行时 | 读取文件、写入/修改文件、读取环境变量 | 主要在本地完成
安全层 -> 通常不需要额外 API Key + 小任务验证 + diff / 日志复核
输出层 -> 可复制结果 + 检查清单 + 下一步迭代
} Snapshot Testing with Verify
When to Use This Skill
Use snapshot testing when:
- Verifying rendered output (HTML emails, reports, generated code)
- Approving public API surfaces for breaking change detection
- Testing HTTP response bodies and headers
- Validating serialization output
- Catching unintended changes in complex objects
What is Snapshot Testing?
Snapshot testing captures output and compares it against a human-approved baseline:
- First run: Test generates a
.received.file with actual output - Human review: Developer approves it, creating a
.verified.file - Subsequent runs: Test compares output against
.verified.file - Changes detected: Test fails, diff tool shows differences for review
This catches unintended changes while allowing intentional changes through explicit approval.
Installation
Add Verify Package
dotnet add package Verify.Xunit
# or for other test frameworks:
dotnet add package Verify.NUnit
dotnet add package Verify.MSTest
Configure ModuleInitializer
Create a ModuleInitializer.cs in your test project:
using System.Runtime.CompilerServices;
public static class ModuleInitializer
{
[ModuleInitializer]
public static void Init()
{
// Use source-file-relative paths for verified files
VerifyBase.UseProjectRelativeDirectory("Snapshots");
// Configure diff tool (optional - auto-detected)
// DiffTools.UseOrder(DiffTool.Rider, DiffTool.VisualStudioCode);
}
}
Basic Usage
Simple Object Verification
[Fact]
public Task VerifyUserDto()
{
var user = new UserDto(
Id: "user-123",
Name: "John Doe",
Email: "john@example.com",
CreatedAt: new DateTime(2025, 1, 15));
return Verify(user);
}
Creates VerifyUserDto.verified.txt:
{
Id: user-123,
Name: John Doe,
Email: john@example.com,
CreatedAt: 2025-01-15T00:00:00
}
String/HTML Verification
[Fact]
public async Task VerifyRenderedEmail()
{
var html = await _emailRenderer.RenderAsync("Welcome", new { Name = "John" });
// Use extension parameter for proper file naming
await Verify(html, extension: "html");
}
Creates VerifyRenderedEmail.verified.html - viewable in browser.
Email Template Testing
Use Verify to catch unintended changes in rendered email templates:
[Fact]
public async Task UserSignupInvitation_RendersCorrectly()
{
var renderer = _services.GetRequiredService<IMjmlTemplateRenderer>();
var variables = new Dictionary<string, string>
{
{ "OrganizationName", "Acme Corporation" },
{ "InviteeName", "John Doe" },
{ "InviterName", "Jane Admin" },
{ "InvitationLink", "https://example.com/invite/abc123" },
{ "ExpirationDate", "December 31, 2025" }
};
var html = await renderer.RenderTemplateAsync(
"UserInvitations/UserSignupInvitation",
variables);
await Verify(html, extension: "html");
}
Benefits for email testing:
- Catches CSS/layout regressions
- Detects broken template variables
- Visual review in diff tool
- Version control tracks email changes
API Surface Approval
Prevent accidental breaking changes to public APIs:
[Fact]
public Task ApprovePublicApi()
{
var assembly = typeof(MyLibrary.PublicClass).Assembly;
var publicApi = assembly.GetExportedTypes()
.OrderBy(t => t.FullName)
.Select(t => new
{
Type = t.FullName,
Members = t.GetMembers(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Static)
.Where(m => m.DeclaringType == t)
.OrderBy(m => m.Name)
.Select(m => m.ToString())
});
return Verify(publicApi);
}
Or use the dedicated ApiApprover package:
dotnet add package PublicApiGenerator
dotnet add package Verify.Xunit
[Fact]
public Task ApproveApi()
{
var api = typeof(MyPublicClass).Assembly.GeneratePublicApi();
return Verify(api);
}
Creates .verified.txt with full API surface - any change requires explicit approval.
HTTP Response Testing
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsExpectedResponse()
{
var client = _factory.CreateClient();
var response = await client.GetAsync("/api/users/123");
// Verify status, headers, and body together
await Verify(new
{
StatusCode = response.StatusCode,
Headers = response.Headers
.Where(h => h.Key.StartsWith("X-")) // Custom headers only
.ToDictionary(h => h.Key, h => h.Value.First()),
Body = await response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync()
});
}
Scrubbing Dynamic Values
Handle timestamps, GUIDs, and other dynamic content:
[Fact]
public Task VerifyOrder()
{
var order = new Order
{
Id = Guid.NewGuid(), // Different every run
CreatedAt = DateTime.UtcNow, // Different every run
Total = 99.99m
};
return Verify(order)
.ScrubMember("Id") // Replace with placeholder
.ScrubMember("CreatedAt");
}
Output:
{
Id: Guid_1,
CreatedAt: DateTime_1,
Total: 99.99
}
Global Scrubbing
Configure in ModuleInitializer:
[ModuleInitializer]
public static void Init()
{
VerifierSettings.ScrubMembersWithType<DateTime>();
VerifierSettings.ScrubMembersWithType<DateTimeOffset>();
VerifierSettings.ScrubMembersWithType<Guid>();
// Scrub specific patterns
VerifierSettings.AddScrubber(s =>
Regex.Replace(s, @"token=[a-zA-Z0-9]+", "token=SCRUBBED"));
}
File Organization
Recommended Structure
tests/
MyApp.Tests/
Snapshots/ # All verified files
EmailTests/
WelcomeEmail.verified.html
PasswordReset.verified.html
ApiTests/
GetUser.verified.txt
EmailTests.cs
ApiTests.cs
ModuleInitializer.cs
.gitignore
# Verify - ignore received files (only commit verified)
*.received.*
.gitattributes
# Treat verified files as generated (collapse in PR diffs)
*.verified.txt linguist-generated=true
*.verified.html linguist-generated=true
*.verified.json linguist-generated=true
CI/CD Integration
Fail on Missing Verified Files
[ModuleInitializer]
public static void Init()
{
// In CI, fail instead of launching diff tool
if (Environment.GetEnvironmentVariable("CI") == "true")
{
VerifyDiffPlex.UseDiffPlex(OutputType.Minimal);
DiffRunner.Disabled = true;
}
}
GitHub Actions
- name: Run tests
run: dotnet test
env:
CI: true
- name: Upload snapshots on failure
if: failure()
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
with:
name: snapshots
path: |
**/*.received.*
**/*.verified.*
When to Use Snapshot Testing
| Scenario | Use Snapshot Testing? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Rendered HTML/emails | Yes | Catches visual regressions |
| API surfaces | Yes | Prevents accidental breaks |
| Serialization output | Yes | Validates wire format |
| Complex object graphs | Yes | Easier than manual assertions |
| Simple value checks | No | Use regular assertions |
| Business logic | No | Use explicit assertions |
| Performance tests | No | Use benchmarks |
Best Practices
DO
// Use descriptive test names - they become file names
[Fact]
public Task UserRegistration_WithValidData_ReturnsConfirmation()
// Scrub dynamic values consistently
VerifierSettings.ScrubMembersWithType<Guid>();
// Use extension parameter for non-text content
await Verify(html, extension: "html");
// Keep verified files in source control
git add *.verified.*
DON'T
// Don't verify random/dynamic data without scrubbing
var order = new Order { Id = Guid.NewGuid() }; // Fails every run!
await Verify(order);
// Don't commit .received files
git add *.received.* // Wrong!
// Don't use for simple assertions
await Verify(result.Count); // Just use Assert.Equal(5, result.Count)
Integration with MJML Email Testing
See the aspnetcore/transactional-emails skill for the complete pattern:
- MJML templates with
{{variable}}placeholders - Render to HTML with test data
- Snapshot test the rendered output
- Review changes in diff tool before approving
This catches:
- Broken variable substitution
- CSS/layout regressions
- Email client compatibility issues
- Unintended content changes
Resources
- Verify GitHub: https://github.com/VerifyTests/Verify
- Verify.Xunit: https://github.com/VerifyTests/Verify.Xunit
- ApiApprover: https://github.com/JakeGinnivan/ApiApprover
- DiffPlex Integration: https://github.com/VerifyTests/Verify.DiffPlex
先判断是否适合
作者设计意图
作者的方法与取舍
边界和复核