Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 待分类

controller-testing(控制器测试)

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。

controller-testing 是待分类类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在待分类类的 11,209 个 Skill 里排第 3,926。

总安装 857周安装 35GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 277核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

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:controller-testing(控制器测试)
来源仓库:https://github.com/hosmelq/agent-skills
仓库路径:skills/controller-testing
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/hosmelq/agent-skills --skill controller-testing
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 npx skills 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。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/hosmelq/agent-skills --skill controller-testing

这个 Skill 是做什么的

这个 Skill 的分类还没最终确定,用法以来源仓库的说明为准。

controller-testing 用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试、用例整理和回归验证,适合编写单元测试、端到端测试或根据失败日志定位问题。适用于 Laravel 控制器功能测试,聚焦 HTTP 行为验证与授权检查。提供 action 级测试描述、路由断言与模型绑定作用域验证支持。

使用时需确认项目测试框架、运行命令与夹具数据,避免为通过测试而破坏真实逻辑。涉及浏览器或外部服务时应区分本地模拟、测试环境与生产环境。

来源仓库内路径:skills/controller-testing

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/hosmelq/agent-skills --skill controller-testin…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

controller-testing 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/hosmelq/agent-skills --skill controller-testing。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

controller-testing 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

controller-testing 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

controller-testing 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

controller-testing 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 857 次,近一周安装 35 次,下载 277 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

controller-testing 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理待分类类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

待分类类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
infsh-cli

infsh CLI · Codex、Claude

4,374,576382权限未标注未明确未收录
ai-video-generation

AI 视频生成 · Codex、Claude

4,313,376382调用外部服务未明确有提醒
lark-openapi-explorer

云雀 OpenAPI 浏览器 · Codex、Claude

2,064,1209,011需要联网未明确有提醒
lark-workflow-standup-report

Lark 工作流程站立报告 · Codex、Claude

2,041,6328,978需要联网未明确通过
use-my-browser

使用我的浏览器 · Codex、Claude

1,848,49140操作浏览器未明确未通过
controller-testing

控制器测试 · 本页

857—需要联网未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Controller Testing

When to Apply

Activate this skill only when the task is about Laravel controller feature tests (action-level HTTP behavior for a controller) and includes signals like:

  • The test file path is under tests/Feature/Http/Controllers/** (including tests/Feature/Http/Controllers/Api/**). This is the primary trigger.
  • The task is explicitly about a controller action and uses action-level describe('create' | 'destroy' | 'edit' | 'index' | 'show' | 'store' | 'update').
  • Controller route assertions using route(...), nested parameters, and route-model binding scope checks.
  • Auth/authorization outcomes and controller transport assertions:

- web/session (get, post, patch, delete, assertInertia, redirects), or - API/JSON (getJson, postJson, patchJson, deleteJson, JSON assertions).

Do not activate this skill based on describe('store') alone (many non-controller feature tests use the same verbs, for example Fortify/auth flows).

Do not use this skill for model/unit tests, service-layer tests, console commands, or non-HTTP behavior.

Kill Switch / Precedence

For controller-focused feature tests, this skill takes precedence over pest-testing. If pest-testing was selected for controller test work, stop and switch to controller-testing immediately.

Quick Start

# Create file only when needed
php artisan make:test --pest Http/Controllers/<Name>ControllerTest --no-interaction

# Run only the affected file
php artisan test --compact tests/Feature/Http/Controllers/<Name>ControllerTest.php

# Optional focused rerun
php artisan test --compact --filter="<test name>"

Decision Workflow

  1. Inspect the controller action, form request, policy, resource, and route definition to derive the contract under test.
  2. Choose transport mode: web/session or API/JSON.
  3. Determine route shape (flat vs nested) and parameter keys.
  4. For each action under test, apply this baseline in order (as applicable):

- requires authentication - policy denial (403) - binding mismatch (404) - validation datasets (store/update) - success response + persistence assertions

  1. Load only the reference files needed for the action/rule pattern.

Output Guardrails (Keep Controller Tests Clean)

These guardrails exist to prevent noisy, inconsistent tests.

  • Treat the controller contract as the source of truth. Templates are starting points only; adapt them to the actual request payload, response shape, redirects, resources, and policy flow implemented by the controller.
  • Keep 403 tests minimal. For forbidden cases, you usually do not need to send a full payload (authorization should fail before validation).
  • Validation datasets must be small and stable:

- Each dataset data should only include the field(s) needed to trigger that rule. Do not repeat a full "valid payload" for every case. - Assert validation messages for every failing field. Do not use keys-only expectations in these datasets. - When multiple fields share a sometimes|required-style blank-value rule, prefer one dataset case that submits blank strings for all of those fields and asserts the required message for each of them. Do not reduce that pattern to a single representative field. - Prefer post(...)/patch(...) directly; avoid from(...) unless you cannot get a reliable redirect-back assertion otherwise.

  • Prefer route-based redirects: use assertRedirectToRoute(...) when a named route exists; use assertRedirect(...) only when the destination is not a named route or is config-driven.

Canonical 403 vs 404 Rule

Use this as the source of truth:

  • If route bindings resolve correctly and authorization denies access, assert assertForbidden() (403).
  • If route-model binding fails (wrong parent/child chain, scoped binding mismatch), assert assertNotFound() (404).

Actor context to keep outcomes deterministic:

  • 403 tests: authenticate an in-scope actor that can resolve bindings but lacks permission.
  • Validation and success-path tests: authenticate an authorized in-scope actor.
  • 404 binding-mismatch tests: any authenticated actor is acceptable because binding fails first.

Reference Map

Load only what you need:

  • API/JSON adaptation guide and full examples:

- references/modes/api-json.md

  • Nested route naming and parameter composition:

- references/route-patterns.md

  • Per-action templates (web/session-first):

- references/actions/create.md - references/actions/destroy.md - references/actions/edit.md - references/actions/index.md - references/actions/show.md - references/actions/store.md - references/actions/update.md

  • Validation catalogs (merge only required rules):

- references/validation/store-validates-fields.md - references/validation/update-validates-fields.md

  • Focused validation patterns (prefer first when matching rules exist):

- references/validation/required-with-and-array.md - references/validation/scoped-exists-and-unique.md - references/validation/prepare-for-validation.md - references/validation/api-login-validation.md

Action references are web/session-first templates. For API/JSON controllers, keep the same action structure and adapt assertions with references/modes/api-json.md based on the controller/resource contract under test.

Baseline Assertions by Transport

Web/session mode:

  • requires authentication -> redirect to login route.
  • Validation failures -> assertRedirectBackWithErrors(...).
  • Page actions -> assertOk() + assertInertia(...).
  • Mutation actions -> redirect + persistence assertions.
  • Toast/flash assertions are optional and app-specific.

API/JSON mode:

  • Protected endpoints: requires authentication -> assertUnauthorized().
  • Public endpoints: skip auth-required test unless the endpoint is protected.
  • Validation failures -> assertUnprocessable() + assertJsonValidationErrors(...).
  • Success actions -> assertOk() / assertCreated() / assertNoContent() + JSON + persistence assertions.
  • Assert validation messages, not just keys, so the test verifies the exact API contract.

Notes

  • One-level, two-level, and three-level examples are patterns, not limits.
  • For destroy, choose persistence assertions by model behavior:

- assertSoftDeleted(...) for soft-deleting models. - assertModelMissing(...) otherwise.

  • Use the app's identifier shape in assertions (id, public_id, slug, route key).

平台分布

Codex

33.17%
按下载量换算92

Claude

27.79%
按下载量换算77

Cursor

18.88%
按下载量换算52

Gemini CLI

10.68%
按下载量换算30

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

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。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills