Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

swift-testing-code-reviewSwift 测试代码审查

Agent Skill

用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试、用例整理和回归验证。它适合让 Agent 编写单元测试、端到端测试、测试计划或根据失败日志定位问题。使用时需要确认项目测试框架、运行命令和夹具数据,避免为了通过测试而改坏真实逻辑;涉及浏览器或外部服务时,应区分本地模拟、测试环境和生产环境。

总安装

5,484

周安装

224

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

1,756
OpenClaw

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

MIT-0

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:swift-testing-code-review(Swift 测试代码审查)
来源仓库:https://github.com/anderskev/swift-testing-code-review
安装命令:
openclaw skills install swift-testing-code-review
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 OpenClaw 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install swift-testing-code-review

简介

swift-testing-code-review 用于 Swift 测试代码的审查与设计辅助,提升测试覆盖与质量。

  • 适用于 iOS/macOS 开发中的单元测试、端到端测试及回归验证场景。
  • 可协助编写测试用例、分析失败日志并定位问题,但需确认框架与运行命令。
  • 安装方式:clawhub;宿主:OpenClaw;分类:研究检索。
  • 避免为通过测试而修改真实逻辑,注意区分模拟环境与生产环境。

SKILL.md

name
swift-testing-code-review
description
Reviews Swift Testing code for proper use of #expect/#require, parameterized tests, async testing, and organization. Use when reviewing .swift files with import Testing, @Test, #expect, @Suite, or confirmation patterns.

Swift Testing Code Review

Hard gates

Complete in order before recording Swift Testing review findings. Stack with beagle-ios:review-verification-protocol for universal review rules.

  1. Scope: You have an explicit list of .swift paths under review (or a user-named single file). Pass: Paths captured in working notes or one line: No Swift files in scope — then stop with no findings.
  2. Swift Testing surface: For each path you treat as Swift Testing code, confirm import Testing or @Test / #expect / #require / @Suite appears in that file (open or search). Pass: At least one match per critiqued file, or you exclude that file from Swift Testing review with a one-line reason (e.g. XCTest-only).
  3. Evidence + protocol: Load beagle-ios:review-verification-protocol before asserting any issue. Pass: Each finding meets that skill’s anchor rules; any violated Review Checklist item cites [FILE:LINE] evidence. If you report zero issues, state Protocol applied; no Swift Testing issues (or equivalent) in the review summary.

Quick Reference

Issue TypeReference
#expect vs #require, expression capture, error testingreferences/expect-macro.md
@Test with arguments, traits, zip() pitfallsreferences/parameterized.md
confirmation, async sequences, completion handlersreferences/async-testing.md
@Suite, tags, parallel execution, .serializedreferences/organization.md

Review Checklist

  • [ ] Expressions embedded directly in #expect (not pre-computed booleans)
  • [ ] #require used only for preconditions, #expect for assertions
  • [ ] Error tests check specific types (not generic (any Error).self)
  • [ ] Parameterized tests with pairs use zip() (not Cartesian product)
  • [ ] No logic mirroring implementation in parameterized expected values
  • [ ] Async sequences tested with confirmation(expectedCount:)
  • [ ] Completion handlers use withCheckedContinuation, not confirmation
  • [ ] .serialized applied only where necessary (shared resources)
  • [ ] Sibling serialized suites nested under parent if mutually exclusive
  • [ ] No assumption of state persistence between @Test functions
  • [ ] Disabled tests have explanations and bug links

When to Load References

  • Reviewing #expect or #require usage -> expect-macro.md
  • Reviewing @Test with arguments or traits -> parameterized.md
  • Reviewing confirmation or async testing -> async-testing.md
  • Reviewing @Suite or test organization -> organization.md

Review Questions

  1. Could pre-computed booleans in #expect lose diagnostic context?
  2. Is #require stopping tests prematurely instead of revealing all failures?
  3. Are multi-argument parameterized tests creating accidental Cartesian products?
  4. Could zip() silently drop test cases due to unequal array lengths?
  5. Are completion handlers incorrectly tested with confirmation?

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

OpenClaw

70.79%
按下载量换算1,243

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills