Agent skill

Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner

by levnikolaevich in levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills

Plans risk-based test portfolios and acceptance evidence; does not write or execute tests.

MITAuto-check passedTesting & QA

Install Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner

skills CLI
$ npx skills add levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-32-test-strategy-planner -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills ln-32-test-strategy-planner --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/plugins/delivery-planning-suite/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner .claude/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
ln-32-test-strategy-planner
GitHub stars
574
Token cost
~3.4k tokens
SKILL.md length
1,744 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
31
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Plans risk-based test portfolios and acceptance evidence; does not write or execute tests.

  • Works in 4 steps: Establish Scope and Evidence → Build the Risk Map → Decide Portfolio Actions, Levels, and… → …
  • Tasks that involve Test strategy
  • SKILL.md covers Tool Routing, Evidence Rules, Checklist and Self-Check, plus 1 more section
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner is an agent skill from levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills. Plans risk-based test portfolios and acceptance evidence; does not write or execute tests.

Its SKILL.md is about 3.4k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

It sits in Testing & QA, covering Test strategy. The repository describes itself as: Help your AI agent finish the job: solve the right problem, keep changes focused, and show what was verified. For Claude Code and Codex. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • Tasks that involve Test strategy

Example prompts

  • “Use the ln-32-test-strategy-planner skill to plan risk-based test portfolios and acceptance evidence; does not write or execute tests”
  • “/ln-32-test-strategy-planner”

Workflow steps

4 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Establish Scope and Evidence
  2. Build the Risk Map
  3. Decide Portfolio Actions, Levels, and Oracles
  4. Produce a Prioritized Test Matrix

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 0ce8796. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner loads about 3.4k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 30 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,744 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~30
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~3.4k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills at commit 0ce8796, republished under its MIT licence (© levnikolaevich). 1,744 words, ~3,376 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
ln-32-test-strategy-planner
description
Plans risk-based test portfolios and acceptance evidence; does not write or execute tests.

Test Strategy Planner

Goal: Design a read-only, risk-based test portfolio decision for the requested scope. Maximize confidence in important local behavior while preventing test growth that lacks a unique defect signal, and define how affected evidence is retained, changed, consolidated, retired, or deliberately omitted.

Execution contract: The checklist defines completion. Track each item internally as PENDING, PROVEN with evidence, CLEARED with evidence its condition is absent, or UNPROVEN with a gap; reading, delegation, tool failure, a zero exit status, or a self-reported success is not proof; only the observed outcome is. Reconcile after each section. Before returning, resolve all PENDING, count only PROVEN and CLEARED, and apply verdict and approval rules to every gap. Preserve intent, scope, and existing authorization. Continue authorized work; ask only for consequential unresolved choices or required external approval. When no one can answer during the run, state the exact question and apply the skill's verdict for the remaining gap instead of waiting or guessing. Scale depth to material risk without skipping checks. Preserve dependency and safety order; otherwise choose an appropriate verification method. Accept equivalent user or repository evidence; no other skill, named artifact, or complete lifecycle is required. Preserve source requirement and decision IDs. Bind reused evidence to relevant source versions, dirty changes, configuration, and environment; invalidate only affected claims. On continuation, reconcile task, authorization, current state, and unresolved evidence. For long work, return a compact continuation record or update an already authorized artifact; read-only skills do not persist it. Distinguish artifact readiness, verified behavior, and external-action authority. Prepare authorized work before required approval. If blocked by an instruction, cite its exact source and unresolved boundary; do not invent approval gates from caution.

Tool Routing

NeedPreferred toolUse it whenFallback
Requirements and repository rulesNative file reads plus GitEstablishing scope, current work, acceptance criteria, and supported commandsUser-provided requirements with explicit limitations
Existing test surfaceFile listing, search, manifests, runner configuration, and CIMapping test levels, fixtures, environments, and conventionsRepository tree and known test entrypoints
Behavior and boundariesLanguage server or host-native code intelligenceTracing entrypoints, consumers, trust boundaries, persistence, queues, and external contractsNarrow search followed by direct inspection
Existing evidenceExisting test/CI reports and test/configuration readsCurrent proof can change the strategyUse static evidence with execution limits; do not execute tests during planning
Current external failure modesOfficial documentation, specifications, advisories, and primary field evidenceAn external contract or real user failure can change scenarios or priorityMark the claim UNVERIFIED; do not invent risk

Keep the run read-only. Do not create tests, fixtures, snapshots, tasks, or documentation, and do not update the reviewed implementation.

Evidence Rules

  • Coverage is discovery evidence, not proof. Require an oracle that would fail for the named defect.

  • Prioritize by impact, plausible failure, uniqueness, detectability, and recovery cost; do not convert those judgments into universal numeric thresholds.

  • Existing tests reduce a gap only when their setup and assertions prove the same behavior and failure mode.

  • Keep portfolio action separate from execution status. Use KEEP, ADD, UPDATE, MERGE, DELETE, or NO_TEST for the decision and PASS, FAIL, BLOCKED, or UNPROVEN only for evidence state.

  • NO_TEST is an explicit risk decision, not missing work. Name the existing proof, alternative control, or accepted residual risk.

  • A persistent test register is optional. Prefer repository-native test names, paths, tags, CI configuration, and task output unless scale or governance requires another maintained artifact.

  • External research is actionable only when it adds a concrete failure mode, boundary, or oracle to this plan.

Checklist

1. Establish Scope and Evidence
  • Resolve the feature, requirements, acceptance criteria, actors, explicit non-goals, and protected human or system outcomes; separate the requested mechanism from the result it must enable and return BLOCKED if there is no concrete behavior to plan for.
  • Read applicable repository instructions and inspect Git state so current work and unrelated changes are not mistaken for established behavior.
  • Detect languages, frameworks, runners, test directories, fixtures, factories, environments, CI gates, coverage, contract tests, and manual test surfaces.
  • Map existing evidence and every test affected by the requested behavior to each requirement; record coverage as complete, partial, missing, or unavailable based on the actual oracle, alongside the execution state defined in Evidence Rules; names and proximity are not proof.
  • Inspect manual, exploratory, incident, and production evidence when it reveals behavior that automated suites do not cover.
  • Identify environment, data, credentials, services, devices, browsers, and destructive-state constraints before proposing scenarios.
  • Record assumptions and unknowns that can change test level, priority, or feasibility, and ask one concise question only when different interpretations materially change the strategy.
2. Build the Risk Map
  • Trace critical flows from actor trigger through entrypoint, runtime wiring, state change, and durable or user-visible outcome.
  • Identify uniquely important local behavior involving money, authentication, authorization, ownership, data integrity, destructive actions, migrations, public contracts, or irreversible workflows.
  • Enumerate plausible defect classes: incorrect success, rejected valid input, accepted invalid input, boundary error, partial failure, duplicate delivery, ordering, timeout, retry, cancellation, race, rollback, recovery, and compatibility drift; state what protected outcome is lost or what concrete harm follows.
  • Separate product risks from implementation details and behavior already guaranteed by a dependency; exclude technically representable states that protect no unique local outcome or decision.
  • Identify privacy-sensitive or regulated test data and require synthetic, minimized, or explicitly approved fixtures.
  • Use current external evidence only when version-sensitive contracts, recurring user failures, abuse patterns, or interoperability risks can change the map.
  • Rank risks qualitatively and explain ties or uncertainty; do not manufacture precision from missing frequency or impact data.
Show full SKILL.md (826 more words)Show less
3. Decide Portfolio Actions, Levels, and Oracles
  • Assign every material risk and affected test exactly one provisional action: KEEP when trusted unique proof remains valid; ADD for an unproved material risk; UPDATE when valuable intent remains but basis, boundary, setup, or oracle changed; MERGE for safely consolidatable proof; DELETE for obsolete, duplicate, trivial, or untrustworthy proof; or NO_TEST when another control or accepted risk is sufficient.

  • For DELETE or MERGE, prove that the test basis is obsolete or identify replacement evidence that preserves every still-required material behavior, failure mode, oracle, and useful failure localization; never retain obsolete proof merely because it already exists.

  • Test value and boundary: Require every test to detect a concrete defect in this product's business logic and name the protected business outcome. Prefer E2E through user or external-system boundaries; use integration or unit tests only for business scenarios difficult to exercise reliably through E2E. Reject platform, trivial-wiring, implementation-detail, and duplicate proof with no distinct business failure signal.

  • Define the minimum sufficient independent oracle, combining observations when the contract requires them: returned contract, durable state, emitted event, rendered behavior, external effect, invariant, or deterministic artifact.

  • Check that mocks and fakes do not bypass the boundary or failure semantics the scenario claims to prove.

  • UI test locators: Use stable project-native semantic locators (roles, accessible names, labels) or explicit IDs/test hooks according to the observable contract and locale strategy. Avoid styling, position, timing, and incidental structure. Treat exact-copy assertions separately when copy is a requirement; do not require product edits solely to add hooks when a robust semantic locator exists.

  • Include positive, invalid, boundary, authorization, error, recovery, concurrency, and compatibility cases only where the risk map makes them material.

  • Specify non-default configuration, time, locale, randomness, ordering, or data scale when defaults could conceal hard-coded behavior.

  • Add browser, device, operating-system, runtime, or version cells only when the supported contract or a known risk makes them decision-relevant.

  • Prefer deterministic setup and bounded data; identify where real dependencies, emulators, disposable environments, or production-like topology are necessary.

  • Define the repository gate or diagnostic role, entry prerequisites, and evidence-based completion criteria for each portfolio action; do not use test count or raw coverage as completion.

4. Produce a Prioritized Test Matrix
  • For every decision, name the test basis, protected outcome, risk, existing evidence or affected test, portfolio action, level, setup, oracle, expected evidence, environment, gate, and result state when known.
  • Define a review or retirement trigger for evidence whose value depends on a contract, migration, compatibility window, workaround, incident, dependency, or temporary risk; do not invent dates without an owned reason.
  • Order scenarios so safety-critical and high-information checks run before expensive breadth, while preserving prerequisite and state dependencies.
  • Identify which scenarios can run in parallel and which share mutable state, rate limits, accounts, devices, or environment setup.
  • Classify gates by failure consequence and required detection time; place slow diagnostic checks outside routine gates only when another control covers release-critical risk.
  • State exclusions explicitly, including scenarios with no unique protected outcome or defect signal, low-value duplication, framework behavior, infeasible environments, and accepted residual risks.
  • Map material requirements and operational risks to distinct evidence, the owning test boundary, prerequisites, and pass criteria; identify which checks remain valid after a requirement or environment changes.
  • Use READY when the strategy is executable and decision-complete, INCOMPLETE when useful partial planning is possible but material evidence is missing, and BLOCKED when requirements or a safety-critical boundary cannot be established.
  • Reconcile the risk map and decision ledger: no material risk or affected test lacks an action and supporting rationale.
  • State the smallest next evidence-gathering action for every INCOMPLETE or BLOCKED area.

Self-Check

  • Reconcile before returning. Check item-level evidence, requirement coverage, contradictions, scope, verdict, and applicable cleanup. Correct the report or authorized artifacts. Reuse valid evidence; do not automatically rescan the repository or rerun successful commands. Repeat checks only for relevant changes, failures, or unresolved evidence. Disclose remaining gaps.

Output Contract

Report in the user's language, in this order; label all five fields and state each fact once. Use controlled plain language: one fact per sentence, usually under 20 words, active voice, and one term per concept, with no synonyms for verdicts, IDs, or states. Small results may use one line per field; omit empty tables and do not copy linked artifacts:

  1. Result: The exact skill-specific verdict token first, then the supported outcome.
  2. Scope: Reviewed/changed scope, exclusions, baseline, and material assumptions.
  3. Evidence: Skill-specific fields below; distinguish facts, inferences, and unverified claims. Link artifacts; use tables when useful.
  4. Verification: Checks/results, unavailable evidence, and applicable cleanup/external state.
  5. Completion: Checklist: X/Y complete; Incomplete: None or each UNPROVEN item's reason, outcome impact, and exact next action; residual risks and required decisions.

Skill-specific evidence: Protected outcome → defect class → impact → existing proof → priority. Per affected test or gap: portfolio action, level/scenario/environment, independent oracle, required/diagnostic gate and result, and review/retirement trigger. Report net portfolio effect and justified NO_TEST, excluded low-value duplication, environment needs, and exact evidence actions for inconclusive areas.

© levnikolaevich, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in plugins/delivery-planning-suite/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner of levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 0ce8796

Compare with similar skills

Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner this skilllevnikolaevich/claude-code-skills574—~3.4kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Testing OpenLogi UIAprilNEA/OpenLogi23k—~1.1kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Testing Hashqlhashintel/hash1.7k—~1.9kAutomated safety check: PassAGPL-3.0
Dynamo Unit TestingDynamoDS/Dynamo2k—~622Automated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Bmad Testarch Test Designbmad-code-org/bmad-method-test-architecture-enterprise1053 repos~1.4kAutomated safety check: PassCustom licence
Test RoadmapOvid/paad131—~3.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Testing OpenLogi UI

    AprilNEA/OpenLogi

    Verifies OpenLogi's native GPUI interface with focused tests, the component gallery and a mock agent, choosing the evidence that fits each change.

    23k GitHub stars~1.1k tokensUpdated today
    Testing & QAAuto-check passed
  • Testing Hashql

    hashintel/hash

    HashQL testing strategies including compiletest (UI tests), unit tests, and snapshot tests.

    1.7k GitHub stars~1.9k tokensUpdated today
    Testing & QAAuto-check passed
  • Dynamo Unit Testing

    DynamoDS/Dynamo

    Write comprehensive NUnit tests for the Dynamo codebase following Dynamo testing patterns, conventions, and architectural constraints.

    2k GitHub stars~622 tokensUpdated yesterday
    Testing & QAAuto-check passed
  • Bmad Testarch Test Design

    bmad-code-org/bmad-method-test-architecture-enterprise

    Create system-level or epic-level test plans. An agent skill from bmad-code-org/bmad-method-test-architecture-enterprise.

    105 GitHub starsUsed in 3 repos~1.4k tokens
    Testing & QAAuto-check passed
  • Test Roadmap

    Ovid/paad

    Analyzes a repository and any existing test suite, grades existing tests for weakness, classifies mocks, emits a phased roadmap for building a test suite that catches real regressions, then executes…

    131 GitHub stars~3.5k tokensUpdated today
    Testing & QAAuto-check passed
  • Designing Tests

    CloudAI-X/opencode-workflow

    Guides test strategy, TDD/BDD approaches, test coverage planning, and testing best practices.

    275 GitHub stars~2.9k tokensUpdated 9 mo ago
    Testing & QAAuto-check passed

More from levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills

All 31 skills in this repo
  • Ln 53 Documentation Auditor

    levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills

    Audits documentation and comments for trust, coverage, consistency and freshness; read-only.

    574 GitHub stars~3.8k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Ln 81 Skill Reviewer

    levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills

    Reviews skill instructions, trigger boundaries and distribution contracts; not product code.

    574 GitHub stars~3.5k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Ln 11 Opportunity Evaluator

    levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills

    Evaluates new product opportunities through demand, channels and economics before committing to build.

    574 GitHub stars~3k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Ln 12 Product Requirements Builder

    levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills

    Defines product requirements, business rules and acceptance criteria for a committed intent; edits product docs only.

    574 GitHub stars~1.9k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Ln 13 Interaction Design Builder

    levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills

    Designs user flows, interaction states and mockups for a defined product scope; does not implement UI code.

    574 GitHub stars~1.8k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Auto-check passed
  • Ln 21 System Design Baseline Builder

    levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills

    Defines measurable architecture drivers and constraints before system design; edits architecture docs only.

    574 GitHub stars~2.5k tokensUpdated 5 days ago
    Auto-check passed

Categories

Questions about Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner

What does Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner do?

Plans risk-based test portfolios and acceptance evidence; does not write or execute tests. Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner is an agent skill from levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills. Plans risk-based test portfolios and acceptance evidence; does not write or execute tests.

When should I use Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner?

Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner fits situations like: tasks that involve Test strategy.

How do I install Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-32-test-strategy-planner -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (plugins/delivery-planning-suite/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner in levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills) into .claude/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner in Codex?

Run `npx skills add levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-32-test-strategy-planner -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (plugins/delivery-planning-suite/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner in levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills) into .agents/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-32-test-strategy-planner -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner, .gemini/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner, .github/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner and .opencode/skills/ln-32-test-strategy-planner in your project.

What does Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner is instructions for the agent only.

Does Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner use?

Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner use?

About 3.4k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 14k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner: Testing OpenLogi UI (AprilNEA/OpenLogi, 23k stars), Testing Hashql (hashintel/hash, 1.7k stars), Dynamo Unit Testing (DynamoDS/Dynamo, 2k stars) and Bmad Testarch Test Design (bmad-code-org/bmad-method-test-architecture-enterprise, 105 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Ln 32 Test Strategy Planner?

levnikolaevich (a GitHub user) maintains it in levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills, which has 574 GitHub stars. The repository holds 31 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 5, 2026.

Source: levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.