--- name: sf-testing description: > Apex test execution, coverage analysis, and test-fix loops with 120-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user runs Apex tests, checks code coverage, fixes failing tests, or touches *Test.cls / *_Test.cls files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: writing Apex production code (use sf-apex), Agentforce agent testing (use sf-ai-agentforce-testing), or Jest/LWC tests (use sf-lwc). license: MIT metadata: version: "1.1.0" author: "Jag Valaiyapathy" scoring: "120 points across 6 categories" --- # sf-testing: Salesforce Test Execution & Coverage Analysis Use this skill when the user needs **Apex test execution and failure analysis**: running tests, checking coverage, interpreting failures, improving coverage, and managing a disciplined test-fix loop for Salesforce code. ## When This Skill Owns the Task Use `sf-testing` when the work involves: - `sf apex run test` workflows - Apex unit-test failures - code coverage analysis - identifying uncovered lines and missing test scenarios - structured test-fix loops for Apex code Delegate elsewhere when the user is: - writing or refactoring production Apex → [sf-apex](../sf-apex/SKILL.md) - testing Agentforce agents → [sf-ai-agentforce-testing](../sf-ai-agentforce-testing/SKILL.md) - testing LWC with Jest → [sf-lwc](../sf-lwc/SKILL.md) --- ## Required Context to Gather First Ask for or infer: - target org alias - desired test scope: single class, specific methods, suite, or local tests - coverage threshold expectation - whether the user wants diagnosis only or a test-fix loop - whether related test data factories already exist --- ## Recommended Workflow ### 1. Discover test scope Identify: - existing test classes - target production classes - test data factories / setup helpers ### 2. Run the smallest useful test set first Start narrow when debugging a failure; widen only after the fix is stable. ### 3. Analyze results Focus on: - failing methods - exception types and stack traces - uncovered lines / weak coverage areas - whether failures indicate bad test data, brittle assertions, or broken production logic ### 4. Run a disciplined fix loop When the issue is code or test quality: - delegate code fixes to [sf-apex](../sf-apex/SKILL.md) when needed - add or improve tests - rerun focused tests before broader regression ### 5. Improve coverage intentionally Cover: - positive path - negative / exception path - bulk path (251+ records where appropriate) - callout or async path when relevant --- ## High-Signal Rules - default to `SeeAllData=false` - every test should assert meaningful outcomes - test bulk behavior, not just single-record happy paths - use factories / `@TestSetup` when they improve clarity and speed - pair `Test.startTest()` with `Test.stopTest()` when async behavior matters - do not hide flaky org dependencies inside tests --- ## Output Format When finishing, report in this order: 1. **What tests were run** 2. **Pass/fail summary** 3. **Coverage result** 4. **Root-cause findings** 5. **Fix or next-run recommendation** Suggested shape: ```text Test run: Org: Result: Coverage: Issues: Next step: ``` --- ## Cross-Skill Integration | Need | Delegate to | Reason | |---|---|---| | fix production code or author tests | [sf-apex](../sf-apex/SKILL.md) | code generation and repair | | create bulk / edge-case data | [sf-data](../sf-data/SKILL.md) | realistic test datasets | | deploy updated tests | [sf-deploy](../sf-deploy/SKILL.md) | rollout | | inspect detailed runtime logs | [sf-debug](../sf-debug/SKILL.md) | deeper failure analysis | --- ## Reference Map ### Start here - [references/cli-commands.md](references/cli-commands.md) - [references/test-patterns.md](references/test-patterns.md) - [references/testing-best-practices.md](references/testing-best-practices.md) - [references/test-fix-loop.md](references/test-fix-loop.md) ### Specialized guidance - [references/mocking-patterns.md](references/mocking-patterns.md) - [references/performance-optimization.md](references/performance-optimization.md) - [assets/](assets/) --- ## Score Guide | Score | Meaning | |---|---| | 108+ | strong production-grade test confidence | | 96–107 | good test suite with minor gaps | | 84–95 | acceptable but strengthen coverage / assertions | | < 84 | below standard; revise before relying on it |