Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

observability-testing(可观察性测试)

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。

observability-testing 是研究检索类 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,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 64,698。

总安装 294周安装 12GitHub Stars 5下载 95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:observability-testing(可观察性测试)
来源仓库:https://github.com/apankov1/quality-engineering
仓库路径:skills/observability-testing
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/apankov1/quality-engineering --skill observability-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/apankov1/quality-engineering --skill observability-testing

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试和回归验证,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中编写测试用例或定位问题。适用于编写单元测试、端到端测试或根据失败日志定位问题的场景。通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装并使用。

使用时需确认项目测试框架和运行命令,避免为了通过测试而改坏真实逻辑。observability-testing 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/observability-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/apankov1/quality-engineering --skill observabi…;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

observability-testing 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/apankov1/quality-engineering --skill observability-testi…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

observability-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。

observability-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。

observability-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。

observability-testing 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 294 次,近一周安装 12 次,下载 95 次,GitHub 5 星。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。

observability-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。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、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。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
observability-testing

可观察性测试 · 本页

2945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

Observability Testing

Test that your code produces correct logs — not just that it runs.

Logs are your only window into production behavior. If critical paths don't log correctly, you're flying blind during incidents. This skill teaches you to verify structured log output as part of your test suite.

When to use: Testing error logging with context, audit trails, monitoring integration, log level policy enforcement, any code where observability matters.

When not to use: Pure business logic tests, UI components, tests where logging is incidental not critical.

Rationalizations (Do Not Skip)

RationalizationWhy It's WrongRequired Action
"Logs are side effects, not behavior"Incorrect logs = blind in productionAssert log output as first-class behavior
"I can see logs when I run it"Manual inspection doesn't scaleAutomate with mock logger assertions
"Any log level is fine"Wrong levels = alert fatigue or missed incidentsEnforce log level policy
"Context isn't important"Context-free logs are useless for debuggingAssert required context fields

What To Protect (Start Here)

Before generating log assertions, identify which observability decisions apply to your code:

DecisionQuestion to AnswerIf Yes → Use
Error paths must be debuggable from logs aloneCould an on-call engineer diagnose this failure without access to the request?assertLogEntry with context fields
Happy paths must not trigger alertsWould a warn/error log here fire a PagerDuty alert on every success?assertNoLogsAbove
Log levels must match operational severityIs this log classified correctly — would the wrong level cause alert fatigue or missed incidents?classifyLogLevel
Error logs must include the Error instanceDoes the error log carry a stack trace for root cause analysis?assertErrorLogged

Do not generate tests for decisions the human hasn't confirmed. A log assertion that checks "error was logged" without verifying the context contains fields an on-call engineer needs is slop — it passes while the team stays blind in production.


Included Utilities

import {
  createMockLogger,
  assertLogEntry,
  assertNoLogsAbove,
  assertHasLogLevel,
  assertErrorLogged,
  LOG_LEVEL_POLICY,
  LOG_LEVEL_ORDER,
  classifyLogLevel,
} from './structured-logger.ts';

Core Workflow

Step 1: Create Mock Logger

Replace real loggers with mock loggers that capture entries for assertion:

const logger = createMockLogger();

// Pass to code under test
await myHandler({ logger });

// Assert on captured entries
assert.equal(logger.entries.length, 2);

Step 2: Assert Specific Log Entries

Verify that specific logs were recorded with correct level, message, and context:

it('logs error with full context on failure', async () => {
  const logger = createMockLogger();

  await assert.rejects(() => myHandler({ logger, shouldFail: true }));

  assertLogEntry(logger, 'error', 'Request failed', {
    component: 'Handler',
    path: '/api/test',
  });
});

Step 3: Verify Happy Path Has No Warnings/Errors

Happy paths should not produce warnings or errors — that's alert fatigue:

it('happy path produces no warnings or errors', async () => {
  const logger = createMockLogger();

  await myHandler({ logger });

  assertNoLogsAbove(logger, 'info');  // Only debug/info allowed
});

Step 4: Verify Error Logs Include Error Instances

Error logs should include the actual Error object for stack traces:

it('error log includes Error instance', async () => {
  const logger = createMockLogger();

  try {
    await myHandler({ logger, causeError: true });
  } catch {}

  assertErrorLogged(logger, 'Database connection failed', {
    name: 'ConnectionError',
    message: 'timeout',
  });
});

Step 5: Follow Log Level Policy

Use the correct log level based on the nature of the message:

// Reference table
console.log(LOG_LEVEL_POLICY);
/*
{
  error: {
    description: "Actionable failures requiring investigation",
    examples: ["Database connection failed", "Authentication error"],
    production: "100% always",
  },
  warn: {
    description: "Degraded but recoverable",
    examples: ["Retry exhausted but fallback worked", "Deprecated API called"],
    production: "100% always",
  },
  info: {
    description: "Significant state changes",
    examples: ["User logged in", "Config loaded", "Session started"],
    production: "sampled (1-10%)",
  },
  debug: {
    description: "Routine operations",
    examples: ["Cache hit/miss", "Heartbeat tick", "Request timing"],
    production: "off (or LOG_LEVEL=warn)",
  },
}
*/

Step 6: Classify Log Levels Automatically

Use the classifier to suggest appropriate levels:

// Returns suggested level based on keywords
classifyLogLevel("Database connection failed");  // 'error'
classifyLogLevel("Retry attempt 3 of 5");        // 'warn'
classifyLogLevel("User logged in");              // 'info'
classifyLogLevel("Cache hit for key xyz");       // 'debug'

Step 7: Enforce Logger Interface

The mock logger implements a strict interface. Your production logger should match:

interface StructuredLogger {
  debug(message: string, context?: Record<string, unknown>): void;
  info(message: string, context?: Record<string, unknown>): void;
  warn(message: string, context?: Record<string, unknown>): void;
  error(message: string, error?: Error, context?: Record<string, unknown>): void;
}

Note: error() has a different signature — it accepts an optional Error instance as the second argument for stack trace capture.


Common Misclassifications

Log MessageWrong LevelCorrect LevelWhy
Cold start recoverywarninfoRecovery is expected, not degradation
Stale flush skipwarndebugExpected race condition, not actionable
Periodic heartbeat tickinfodebugRoutine operation, not state change
User authentication failedinfoerrorSecurity event requiring investigation
Config validation warningdebugwarnHuman should know about config issues

Violation Rules

missing_error_log_assertion

Error paths MUST have log assertions verifying correct error logging with context. Severity: must-fail

happy_path_logs_error

Happy paths MUST NOT produce warn or error logs. Use assertNoLogsAbove(logger, 'info'). Severity: must-fail

log_level_misclassification

Log levels MUST follow the policy. Routine operations at warn/error = alert fatigue. Severity: should-fail

missing_context_fields

Error logs MUST include context fields for debugging (component, userId, requestId, etc.). Severity: should-fail

console_spy_instead_of_mock

DO NOT spy on console.* — use a proper mock logger interface. Severity: must-fail


Companion Skills

This skill provides testing utilities for structured logging, not logging architecture guidance. For broader methodology:

  • Search logging or observability on skills.sh for production logging architecture, wide events, and OpenTelemetry integration
  • Error paths tested here often originate from resilience scenarios — use fault-injection-testing for circuit breaker, retry policy, and queue preservation testing
  • State machine transitions should log state changes at correct levels — use model-based-testing for systematic transition matrix coverage

Quick Reference

AssertionWhenExample
assertLogEntryVerify specific logassertLogEntry(logger, 'error', 'Failed', {component: 'X'})
assertNoLogsAboveHappy path validationassertNoLogsAbove(logger, 'info')
assertHasLogLevelVerify level existsassertHasLogLevel(logger, 'error')
assertErrorLoggedVerify Error instanceassertErrorLogged(logger, 'Failed', {name: 'TypeError'})
classifyLogLevelSuggest correct levelclassifyLogLevel("Connection timeout") → 'warn'

See patterns.md for correlation field patterns, log level migration guides, and framework integration.

平台分布

Codex

35.56%
按下载量换算34

Claude

28.81%
按下载量换算27

Cursor

17.11%
按下载量换算16

Gemini CLI

8.87%
按下载量换算8

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