Start / Skills / Entwickler-Produktivität / Testgetriebene Entwicklung (TDD)
Entwickler-Produktivität

Testgetriebene Entwicklung (TDD)

Jesse VincentMITSprache des Skills: Englisch
Lizenz geprüftKeine SkripteMittleres Risiko
DemoEchter Lauf · claude-sonnet-5-5 · Oktober 2026
Using the test-driven-development skill, implement a TypeScript function slugify(title: string) that lowercases the text, trims it, turns runs of spaces into single hyphens and removes characters that are not letters, digits or hyphens. You cannot run commands here, so show each step of the process and say what you would run and what output you expect at each point.
Skill: test-driven-development
Read: writing-good-tests.md

I can't run commands or create files here, so nothing below has been executed. The "expected output" blocks are predictions in vitest's format. I also haven't looked at the repo's package.json, so I'm assuming vitest and src/slugify.ts plus src/slugify.test.ts. With jest the commands and output would differ slightly.

Cycle 1: lowercasing

RED. The break this test catches is slugify returning the input unchanged. The expected value is a hand-written literal.

// src/slugify.test.ts
import { describe, expect, test } from 'vitest';
import { slugify } from './slugify';

describe('slugify', () => {
  test('lowercases the title', () => {
    expect(slugify('Hello')).toBe('hello');
  });
});

Verify RED. Run npx vitest run src/slugify.test.ts. I expect an error rather than a failure, because the module doesn't exist yet:

FAIL  src/slugify.test.ts
Error: Failed to resolve import "./slugify" from "src/slugify.test.ts"

The skill says an error doesn't count as a failure, so I'd add only a stub to get a real assertion failure:

// src/slugify.ts
export function slugify(title: string): string {
  return '';
}

Re-run the same command. Expected:

FAIL  src/slugify.test.ts > slugify > lowercases the title
AssertionError: expected '' to be 'hello'
Tests  1 failed (1)

The feature is missing and there are no typos, so this is the right failure.

GREEN. This is the minimal code:

export function slugify(title: string): string {
  return title.toLowerCase();
}

Re-run. Expected: Tests 1 passed (1).

Cycle 2: trimming

RED. The break caught is leading or trailing whitespace surviving.

  test('trims surrounding whitespace', () => {
    expect(slugify('  Hello  ')).toBe('hello');
  });

Verify RED. Run the same command. Expected:

FAIL  ... > trims surrounding whitespace
AssertionError: expected '  hello  ' to be 'hello'
Tests  1 failed | 1 passed (2)

GREEN.

  return title.toLowerCase().trim();

Verify GREEN. Expected: Tests 2 passed (2).

Cycle 3: runs of spaces become a single hyphen

RED. The break caught is spaces being left in place, or each space becoming its own hyphen. The input has a single space and a run of three, so a / /g replacement would fail it.

  test('turns each run of spaces into a single hyphen', () => {
    expect(slugify('hello world')).toBe('hello-world');
    expect(slugify('hello   big   world')).toBe('hello-big-world');
  });

Verify RED. Expected:

AssertionError: expected 'hello world' to be 'hello-world'
Tests  1 failed | 2 passed (3)

GREEN.

  return title.toLowerCase().trim().replace(/ +/g, '-');

Verify GREEN. Expected: Tests 3 passed (3).

Cycle 4: stripping disallowed characters

RED. The breaks caught are punctuation surviving, and an over-eager strip that removes existing hyphens. Using well-known in the input covers the second one.

  test('removes characters that are not letters, digits or hyphens', () => {
    expect(slugify('Hello, World!')).toBe('hello-world');
    expect(slugify('Well-Known Thing #1')).toBe('well-known-thing-1');
  });

Verify RED. Expected:

AssertionError: expected 'hello,-world!' to be 'hello-world'
Tests  1 failed | 3 passed (4)

GREEN. The strip runs after lowercasing, so uppercase letters aren't removed by mistake.

  return title
    .toLowerCase()
    .trim()
    .replace(/ +/g, '-')
    .replace(/[^a-z0-9-]/g, '');

Verify GREEN. Expected: Tests 4 passed (4).

Refactor

I'd split the pipeline into one named step per line with no behavior change. I don't think it's worth doing here, since the chain is already four short lines. Re-run to confirm 4 passed if you do.

Final verification

The skill requires the whole project suite, not just my file. Run npx vitest run (or npm test if the repo defines it). I expect all test files to pass with no warnings. Any failure in a pre-existing test should be reported by name, even if slugify didn't cause it.

Mutation check

Mutation Test that fails
Remove .toLowerCase() Cycle 1
Remove .trim() Cycle 2
/ +/g → / /g Cycle 3, the three-space input
Remove the strip step Cycle 4
Strip regex without - in the allowed set Cycle 4, well-known
Strip before lowercasing Cycle 4, H and W would be removed

Every realistic mutation is caught.

Decisions for you

I left these out because you didn't specify them, and each would need its own failing test first:

  • Non-ASCII letters: café currently becomes caf, because "letters" is implemented as a-z. Unicode support would use \p{L} with the u flag.
  • Adjacent hyphens: Rock & Roll becomes rock--roll, because the space-to-hyphen step runs before the strip. Collapsing repeated hyphens, or trimming leading and trailing ones, is a separate behavior.
  • Tabs and newlines: only the space character is treated as a separator, as specified.

Real run in an isolated folder with only this skill installed. Only the Skill and Read tools were enabled, so no command was run and no file was written. The example is fictional. The model could not run the tests, so it says what it would run and what output it expects at each step. The model opened one of the skill's reference files.

Was es macht

Erzwingt testgetriebene Entwicklung bei Funktionen, Fehlerbehebungen, Refactorings und Verhaltensänderungen. Das eiserne Gesetz: kein Produktionscode ohne vorher fehlschlagenden Test. Die Schleife lautet: einen minimalen Test für ein Verhalten schreiben, ausführen und bestätigen, dass er aus dem richtigen Grund fehlschlägt, den einfachsten bestehenden Code schreiben, erneut ausführen und bestätigen, dass die gesamte Projekt-Testsuite grün ist (nicht nur Ihre Datei), dann bei grünen Tests refaktorieren. Enthalten sind gute und schlechte Beispiele, eine Tabelle üblicher Ausreden („zu einfach zum Testen“, „ich teste später“), eine Warnzeichenliste, eine Prüfliste und ein Fehlerbehebungsbeispiel. Eine zweite Datei, writing-good-tests.md, behandelt, wie man ehrliche Tests schreibt: zuerst benennen, welchen Bruch der Test fangen soll, echtes Verhalten statt Mocks prüfen, reinen Testcode aus Produktionsklassen heraushalten und eine Mutationsprüfung.

Geeignet für

Jede Änderung, bei der Tests wirklich etwas beweisen sollen, und Fehlerbehebungen, die behoben bleiben.

Hinweise & Risiken

Mittleres Risiko: Es lässt das Modell Ihre Testbefehle ausführen, und Tests führen den Code Ihres Projekts aus. Seine strengste Regel besagt, dass vor dem Test geschriebener Code gelöscht und neu begonnen werden muss („löschen heißt löschen“); das zielt auf Code, den das Modell gerade geschrieben hat, doch committen oder sichern Sie vorsichtshalber Ihre Arbeit und nennen Sie vorab die erlaubten Ausnahmen (Wegwerf-Prototypen, generierter Code, Konfigurationsdateien). Es verlangt, die komplette Projekt-Testsuite auszuführen; Nebenwirkungen langsamer oder destruktiver Tests gehen daher zu Ihren Lasten. Der Ton ist bewusst streng und absolut. Einmal getestet; das Modell konnte keine Befehle ausführen und sagte, was es ausführen würde.