devflow-kit 3.12.1 → 3.13.0

package/src/assets/skills/quality-gates/references/violations.md

@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ for (let i = 0; i <= array.length; i++) {  // Should be < not <=
 
 **Checklist**:
 - [ ] Happy path works correctly
-- [ ] Edge cases handled (null, empty, boundary values)
+- [ ] Named edge cases handled (null, empty, boundary values)
 - [ ] Error cases handled gracefully
 - [ ] No race conditions in concurrent code
 - [ ] No infinite loops or recursion without base case
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ it('creates user', async () => {
   expect(mockDb.insert).toHaveBeenCalled();  // Only checks mock was called
 });
 
-// BAD: Missing edge case tests
+// BAD: No test for a named edge case (division by zero)
 describe('divide', () => {
   it('divides numbers', () => {
     expect(divide(10, 2)).toBe(5);
@@ -215,9 +215,9 @@ describe('divide', () => {
 
 **Checklist**:
 - [ ] New code has corresponding tests
-- [ ] Tests cover happy path
-- [ ] Tests cover error cases
-- [ ] Tests cover edge cases
+- [ ] Tests cover each acceptance-criterion behaviour
+- [ ] Tests cover each trust-boundary, data-loss, security and fail-closed path
+- [ ] Edge-case tests exist only for named cases
 - [ ] Tests are not brittle (test behavior, not implementation)
 - [ ] Tests would fail if code breaks
 

package/src/assets/skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ activation:
 
 # Test-Driven Development
 
-Use the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle for all implementation work. Tests define the design. Code satisfies the tests. Refactoring improves the design without changing behavior.
+Use the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle for all implementation work. Refactoring improves the design without changing behavior.
 
 ## Iron Law
 
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ Write a test that describes the behavior you want. Run it. Watch it fail. The fa
 
 Write the simplest production code that makes the failing test pass. Hardcode first if that is simplest; generalize when the next test forces it. No code for later, no optimizing, no cleanup.
 
-**Checkpoint:** All affected tests pass. If any test fails, fix it before moving on.
+**Checkpoint:** All affected tests pass.
 
 ### Step 3: REFACTOR — Improve Without Changing Behavior
 
@@ -78,12 +78,12 @@ An excuse to skip the test-first step is a rationalization: reject it. `referenc
 
 ## What to Test
 
-Follow the project's test layout and conventions, and import the module under test, not its internal helpers.
+Follow the project's test layout, and import the module under test, not its helpers.
 
 | Test | Don't Test |
 |------|------------|
 | Public API behavior | Private implementation details |
-| Error conditions and edge cases | Framework internals |
+| Trust-boundary, data-loss, security and fail-closed paths; named edge cases | Framework internals |
 | Integration points (boundaries) | Third-party library correctness |
 | State transitions | Getter/setter plumbing (unless non-trivial) |
 
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ When you skip TDD, state the reason from this list: "Skipping TDD because: [reas
 
 ## By Mode
 
-- **IMPLEMENT**: write the failing test before production code, one behavior at a time. The Code agent preloads this skill.
+- **IMPLEMENT**: write the failing test before production code, one behavior at a time.
 - **DEBUG**: write a test that reproduces the bug first, then fix.
 - **PLAN**: the plan has a test strategy and orders test files first.
 - **RESOLVE**: the Code agent (issue-fix mode) writes a failing-then-passing regression test for every fix.

package/src/assets/skills/test-driven-development/references/rationalization-prevention.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ The excuses table, the mid-work red flags, a test-first example, and detailed co
 | Excuse | Why It Feels Right | Why It's Wrong | Correct Action |
 |--------|-------------------|----------------|----------------|
 | "I'll write tests after" | Need to see the shape first | Tests ARE the shape — they define the interface before implementation exists | Write the test first |
-| "Too simple to test" | It's just a getter/setter | Getters break, defaults change, edge cases hide in "simple" code | Write it — takes 30 seconds |
+| "Too simple to test" | It's just a getter/setter | Getters break and defaults change; code with an acceptance-criterion behaviour always gets its test | Test that behaviour — takes 30 seconds |
 | "I'll refactor later" | Just get it working now | "Later" never comes; technical debt compounds silently | Refactor now in Step 3 |
 | "Test is too hard to write" or "the test setup is too complex" | Mocking is painful | Hard-to-test code = bad design, and complex setup = too much coupling; the test is telling you the interface is wrong | Simplify the interface first |
 | "Need to see the whole picture" or "the architecture first" | Can't test what I haven't designed or structured yet | TDD IS design; each test reveals the next piece of the interface, and tests DEFINE the architecture | Let the tests drive the design and structure |

package/src/assets/skills/testing/SKILL.md

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ activation:
 |-------|---------|
 | Pyramid | Many unit → fewer integration → fewest E2E |
 | Trophy | Integration tests give best ROI for UI-heavy code |
-| Google | 70% unit / 20% integration / 10% E2E; avoid E2E excess |
+| Google | 70% unit / 20% integration / 10% E2E |
 
 ## Test Doubles Taxonomy
 
@@ -89,8 +89,8 @@ Quarantine flaky tests immediately — a suite that sometimes passes is worse th
 | Severity | Criteria |
 |----------|----------|
 | **CRITICAL** | Tests don't verify behavior; critical paths untested; everything mocked |
-| **HIGH** | Missing error paths; flaky tests; slow (>10s); setup >10 lines |
-| **MEDIUM** | Missing edge cases; weak assertions; unclear AAA structure |
+| **HIGH** | Untested trust-boundary, data-loss, security or fail-closed path; flaky tests; slow (>10s); setup >10 lines |
+| **MEDIUM** | Named edge case with no test; weak assertions; unclear AAA structure |
 | **LOW** | Organization; naming clarity |
 
 ## Test Suite Safety
@@ -103,17 +103,17 @@ Quarantine flaky tests immediately — a suite that sometimes passes is worse th
 
 | Reference | Contents |
 |-----------|----------|
-| `references/sources.md` | Full bibliography (20 sources) |
-| `references/violations.md` | Extended violations with citations |
+| `references/sources.md` | Bibliography (20 sources) |
+| `references/violations.md` | Violations with citations |
 | `references/patterns.md` | Correct patterns with citations |
-| `references/detection.md` | Bash commands for automated detection |
-| `references/report-template.md` | Report format for documenting issues |
+| `references/detection.md` | Detection commands |
+| `references/report-template.md` | Report format |
 
 ## Quality Gates
 
-- [ ] Setup <10 lines; use fakes over mocks for complex dependencies
+- [ ] Setup <10 lines
 - [ ] Each new assertion would fail, not error, with the change reverted: its RED run counts, else a bad input or a temporary uncommitted revert of your own edit, never a stash
-- [ ] All branches covered: happy path + errors + edge cases
+- [ ] A test for each acceptance-criterion behaviour; an edge-case test only for a named case
 - [ ] Test names describe expected behavior
 - [ ] Tests follow Arrange-Act-Assert structure
 - [ ] No flaky patterns

package/src/assets/skills/testing/references/report-template.md

@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ Use this template when reporting test design issues.
 |----------|---------|---------|
 | **CRITICAL** | Fundamental design flaws | Complex setup >10 lines, repetitive boilerplate >3 times, mock objects >5 methods, testing private methods |
 | **HIGH** | Maintenance complications | Difficult mocking >20 lines, implementation testing, environment manipulation, database seeding |
-| **MEDIUM** | Reduced clarity | Test helper abuse, inconsistent assertion patterns, missing edge case coverage |
+| **MEDIUM** | Reduced clarity | Test helper abuse, inconsistent assertion patterns, a named edge case with no test |
 | **LOW** | Minor improvements | Organization, naming clarity |
 
 ---

package/src/assets/skills/testing/references/violations.md

@@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ it('marks order as paid', async () => {
 
 ## Coverage Violations [4]
 
-### Missing Edge Cases [4]
+### Missing Named Edge Cases [4]
 
 Google SWE Book: happy-path-only tests provide false confidence [4]: