Directory → SKILL
SKILLbundledHermes Bundled Skills

Test Driven Development

TDD: enforce RED-GREEN-REFACTOR, tests before code

testingtdddevelopmentqualityred-green-refactorBundledHermes skill
Last registry verification2026-08-18v1.1.0Hermes Agent (adapted from obra/superpowers)
Plain meaning

What does it add to Hermes?

TDD: enforce RED-GREEN-REFACTOR, tests before code

Test Driven Development is a skill related to files and documents. It can let the agent read, organize, or create documents within the folder or account scope you grant.

This plain-language explanation is based on the publisher description. The original text remains visible for verification.

Use it when

Use it when your goal in files and documents is clear and you can limit it to the data and actions it actually needs.

Skip it when

Do not add it merely to experiment when Hermes already has a simpler path, or when you cannot review its source and permissions.

Who is it for?

Best for users who want a repeatable way of working inside Hermes.

Safe first test

Use a test folder containing copies of non-sensitive files and begin with one read operation.

Original publisher description

TDD: enforce RED-GREEN-REFACTOR, tests before code

✓
Data source

This entry was indexed from Hermes Bundled Skills. Our explanation interprets the type and domain without inventing a capability not present upstream.

!
Security review

The source is official or editorially reviewed, but you still need to review permissions and version compatibility.

Safe setup path

Inspect, install, then test.

  1. 01
    Open the source

    Match the publisher, license, and description to your need. Check the real update history.

  2. 02
    Review permissions and secrets

    Never paste a secret value into this site. Use environment-variable names and grant the smallest scope.

  3. 03
    Copy setup only after review

    The controls below copy text. They do not execute commands on your device.

  4. 04
    Test with a non-sensitive task

    Inspect the visible tools, then exclude write or delete tools you do not need.

Setup method

Already installed with Hermes.

This skill ships with Hermes and loads when the agent decides it is relevant. There is nothing to install; read the definition below so you know what it will do.

Open the official page ↗
The full skill definition

Exactly what Hermes loads when this skill runs.

Reproduced from the official documentation. Read it before enabling the skill: this text becomes the agent's instructions.

TDD: enforce RED-GREEN-REFACTOR, tests before code.

Skill metadata

A lookup table. Do not read it all; find the row that applies to you.

SourceBundled (installed by default)
Pathskills/software-development/test-driven-development
Version1.1.0
AuthorHermes Agent (adapted from obra/superpowers)
LicenseMIT
Platformslinux, macos, windows
Tagstesting, tdd, development, quality, red-green-refactor
Related skillssystematic-debugging, plan, subagent-driven-development

Reference: full SKILL.md

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

Overview

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.

Core principle: If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.

Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.

When to Use

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

Always:

  • New features
  • Bug fixes
  • Refactoring
  • Behavior changes

Exceptions (ask the user first):

  • Throwaway prototypes
  • Generated code
  • Configuration files

Thinking "skip TDD just this once"? Stop. That's rationalization.

The Iron Law

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

Text1 line
NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST

Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.

No exceptions:

  • Don't keep it as "reference"
  • Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
  • Don't look at it
  • Delete means delete

Implement fresh from tests. Period.

Red-Green-Refactor Cycle

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

RED — Write Failing Test

Write one minimal test showing what should happen.

Good test:

Python13 lines
def test_retries_failed_operations_3_times():
    attempts = 0
    def operation():
        nonlocal attempts
        attempts += 1
        if attempts < 3:
            raise Exception('fail')
        return 'success'

    result = retry_operation(operation)

    assert result == 'success'
    assert attempts == 3

Clear name, tests real behavior, one thing.

Bad test:

Python5 lines
def test_retry_works():
    mock = MagicMock()
    mock.side_effect = [Exception(), Exception(), 'success']
    result = retry_operation(mock)
    assert result == 'success'  # What about retry count? Timing?

Vague name, tests mock not real code.

Requirements:

  • One behavior per test
  • Clear descriptive name ("and" in name? Split it)
  • Real code, not mocks (unless truly unavoidable)
  • Name describes behavior, not implementation

Verify RED — Watch It Fail

MANDATORY. Never skip.

Shell2 lines
# Use terminal tool to run the specific test
pytest tests/test_feature.py::test_specific_behavior -v

Confirm:

  • Test fails (not errors from typos)
  • Failure message is expected
  • Fails because the feature is missing

Test passes immediately? You're testing existing behavior. Fix the test.

Test errors? Fix the error, re-run until it fails correctly.

GREEN — Minimal Code

Write the simplest code to pass the test. Nothing more.

Good:

Python2 lines
def add(a, b):
    return a + b  # Nothing extra

Bad:

Python4 lines
def add(a, b):
    result = a + b
    logging.info(f"Adding {a} + {b} = {result}")  # Extra!
    return result

Don't add features, refactor other code, or "improve" beyond the test.

Cheating is OK in GREEN:

  • Hardcode return values
  • Copy-paste
  • Duplicate code
  • Skip edge cases

We'll fix it in REFACTOR.

Verify GREEN — Watch It Pass

MANDATORY.

Shell5 lines
# Run the specific test
pytest tests/test_feature.py::test_specific_behavior -v

# Then run ALL tests to check for regressions
pytest tests/ -q

Confirm:

  • Test passes
  • Other tests still pass
  • Output pristine (no errors, warnings)

Test fails? Fix the code, not the test.

Other tests fail? Fix regressions now.

REFACTOR — Clean Up

After green only:

  • Remove duplication
  • Improve names
  • Extract helpers
  • Simplify expressions

Keep tests green throughout. Don't add behavior.

If tests fail during refactor: Undo immediately. Take smaller steps.

Repeat

Next failing test for next behavior. One cycle at a time.

Avoid Horizontal Slices

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

Do not write all tests first and then all implementation. That is horizontal slicing: RED becomes "write a pile of imagined tests" and GREEN becomes "make the pile pass." It produces brittle tests because the tests are designed before the implementation has taught you what behavior and interface actually matter.

Use vertical tracer bullets instead:

Text8 lines
WRONG:
  RED:   test1, test2, test3, test4
  GREEN: impl1, impl2, impl3, impl4

RIGHT:
  RED→GREEN: test1→impl1
  RED→GREEN: test2→impl2
  RED→GREEN: test3→impl3

A tracer bullet is one end-to-end behavior slice. It proves the path works, teaches you about the interface, and keeps each next test grounded in what you just learned.

Why Order Matters

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

"I'll write tests after to verify it works"

Tests written after code pass immediately. Passing immediately proves nothing:

  • Might test the wrong thing
  • Might test implementation, not behavior
  • Might miss edge cases you forgot
  • You never saw it catch the bug

Test-first forces you to see the test fail, proving it actually tests something.

"I already manually tested all the edge cases"

Manual testing is ad-hoc. You think you tested everything but:

  • No record of what you tested
  • Can't re-run when code changes
  • Easy to forget cases under pressure
  • "It worked when I tried it" ≠ comprehensive

Automated tests are systematic. They run the same way every time.

"Deleting X hours of work is wasteful"

Sunk cost fallacy. The time is already gone. Your choice now:

  • Delete and rewrite with TDD (high confidence)
  • Keep it and add tests after (low confidence, likely bugs)

The "waste" is keeping code you can't trust.

"TDD is dogmatic, being pragmatic means adapting"

TDD IS pragmatic:

  • Finds bugs before commit (faster than debugging after)
  • Prevents regressions (tests catch breaks immediately)
  • Documents behavior (tests show how to use code)
  • Enables refactoring (change freely, tests catch breaks)

"Pragmatic" shortcuts = debugging in production = slower.

"Tests after achieve the same goals — it's spirit not ritual"

No. Tests-after answer "What does this do?" Tests-first answer "What should this do?"

Tests-after are biased by your implementation. You test what you built, not what's required. Tests-first force edge case discovery before implementing.

Common Rationalizations

A lookup table. Do not read it all; find the row that applies to you.

ExcuseReality
"Too simple to test"Simple code breaks. Test takes 30 seconds.
"I'll test after"Tests passing immediately prove nothing.
"Tests after achieve same goals"Tests-after = "what does this do?" Tests-first = "what should this do?"
"Already manually tested"Ad-hoc ≠ systematic. No record, can't re-run.
"Deleting X hours is wasteful"Sunk cost fallacy. Keeping unverified code is technical debt.
"Keep as reference, write tests first"You'll adapt it. That's testing after. Delete means delete.
"Need to explore first"Fine. Throw away exploration, start with TDD.
"Test hard = design unclear"Listen to the test. Hard to test = hard to use.
"TDD will slow me down"TDD faster than debugging. Pragmatic = test-first.
"Manual test faster"Manual doesn't prove edge cases. You'll re-test every change.
"Existing code has no tests"You're improving it. Add tests for the code you touch.

Red Flags — STOP and Start Over

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

If you catch yourself doing any of these, delete the code and restart with TDD:

  • Code before test
  • Test after implementation
  • Test passes immediately on first run
  • Can't explain why test failed
  • Tests added "later"
  • Rationalizing "just this once"
  • "I already manually tested it"
  • "Tests after achieve the same purpose"
  • "Keep as reference" or "adapt existing code"
  • "Already spent X hours, deleting is wasteful"
  • "TDD is dogmatic, I'm being pragmatic"
  • "This is different because..."

All of these mean: Delete code. Start over with TDD.

Verification Checklist

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

Before marking work complete:

  • [ ] Every new function/method has a test
  • [ ] Watched each test fail before implementing
  • [ ] Each test failed for expected reason (feature missing, not typo)
  • [ ] Wrote minimal code to pass each test
  • [ ] All tests pass
  • [ ] Output pristine (no errors, warnings)
  • [ ] Tests use real code (mocks only if unavoidable)
  • [ ] Edge cases and errors covered

Can't check all boxes? You skipped TDD. Start over.

When Stuck

A lookup table. Do not read it all; find the row that applies to you.

ProblemSolution
Don't know how to testWrite the wished-for API. Write the assertion first. Ask the user.
Test too complicatedDesign too complicated. Simplify the interface.
Must mock everythingCode too coupled. Use dependency injection.
Test setup hugeExtract helpers. Still complex? Simplify the design.

Hermes Agent Integration

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

Running Tests

Use the terminal tool to run tests at each step:

Python8 lines
# RED — verify failure
terminal("pytest tests/test_feature.py::test_name -v")

# GREEN — verify pass
terminal("pytest tests/test_feature.py::test_name -v")

# Full suite — verify no regressions
terminal("pytest tests/ -q")

With delegatetask

When dispatching subagents for implementation, enforce TDD in the goal:

Python16 lines
delegate_task(
    goal="Implement [feature] using strict TDD",
    context="""
    Follow test-driven-development skill:
    1. Write failing test FIRST
    2. Run test to verify it fails
    3. Write minimal code to pass
    4. Run test to verify it passes
    5. Refactor if needed
    6. Commit

    Project test command: pytest tests/ -q
    Project structure: [describe relevant files]
    """,
    toolsets=['terminal', 'file']
)

With systematic-debugging

Bug found? Write failing test reproducing it. Follow TDD cycle. The test proves the fix and prevents regression.

Never fix bugs without a test.

Testing Anti-Patterns

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

  • Testing mock behavior instead of real behavior — mocks should verify interactions, not replace the system under test
  • Testing implementation details — test behavior/results, not internal method calls
  • Happy path only — always test edge cases, errors, and boundaries
  • Brittle tests — tests should verify behavior, not structure; refactoring shouldn't break them

Final Rule

Explains the idea itself. Read it slowly; the later sections build on it.

Text2 lines
Production code → test exists and failed first
Otherwise → not TDD

No exceptions without the user's explicit permission.