SKILLEMALL.ai

BC testing-livekit-agents

Writes turn-level tests for a LiveKit agent in the user's normal test suite: pytest (Python) or Vitest (Node.js). Use when the user asks to "write tests for my agent", "add a test for this tool", "test the handoff", "pin this bug", "why does my agent test fail", or after building or changing agent behavior that needs regression coverage. Covers the SDK's test session harness, assertions on messages, tool calls and handoffs, LLM judging of a reply against an intent, mocking tools, multi-turn tests, and judging whole conversations with the built-in judges. For interactive poking use debugging-livekit-agents. For grading whole conversations at scale use running-livekit-simulations.

fcakyon/claude-codex-settings Agent Skills author: fcakyon 1 file body ≈ 1 702 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 7 h ago

Writes turn-level tests for a LiveKit agent in the user's normal test suite: pytest (Python) or Vitest (Node.js). Use when the user asks to "write tests for…

As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

GeneratorAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
B
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
86
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
62/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 22 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1702 tokens

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 5 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 687: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 9 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 22 items
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.