Gusen1453/creed

TDD

Overview

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

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

REQUIRED COMPANION: use test-design for what to feed, assert, and mock. This skill is only the rhythm. Formalistic RED tests are still forbidden — a failing theater test proves nothing.

When to Use

Always: new features, bug fixes, refactoring, behavior changes.

Exceptions (ask the human first): throwaway prototypes, generated code, pure config with no behavior.

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

The Iron Law (non-negotiable)

NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST

Wrote 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

Violating the letter is violating the spirit.

Workflow (when invoked)

Announce "Using tdd to …", then one todo per cycle step:

1. RED — one failing behavior test (apply test-design: contract, narrow asserts, hand-written expected)
2. Verify RED — run it; confirm fail for the right reason (missing feature, not typo/error)
3. GREEN — minimal production code to pass
4. Verify GREEN — run it; all relevant tests pass; output pristine
5. REFACTOR — clean up; stay green; no new behavior
6. Repeat — next behavior → next RED

Bug found later? Write a failing reproduction test first, then the same cycle.

Red → Green → Refactor

RED — write one failing test

One behavior. Clear name (role + scenario + expectation). Real collaborators unless IO forces a Fake/Recording (see test-design).

test("retries failed operations 3 times", async () => {
  let attempts = 0
  const operation = () => {
    attempts++
    if (attempts < 3) throw new Error("fail")
    return "success"
  }
  expect(await retryOperation(operation)).toBe("success")
  expect(attempts).toBe(3)
})

Bad: vague name, asserts only on mock call counts, or expected computed with production logic.

Verify RED — mandatory

Run the targeted test. Confirm:

• Fails (not errors out from typos/imports)
• Failure message matches the missing behavior
• If it passes immediately → you're testing existing behavior or asserting nothing real — fix the test
• If it errors → fix the harness, re-run until it fails correctly

GREEN — minimal code

Simplest code that passes. No extra features, no drive-by refactors, no YAGNI options objects.

Verify GREEN — mandatory

Run again. All related tests pass. No new warnings/errors ignored.

REFACTOR

Only after green: names, duplication, helpers. Keep tests green. Don't add behavior (new behavior → new RED).

Good vs bad tests (rhythm lens)

	Good	Bad
Size	One behavior; "and" in the name → split	Kitchen-sink test
Name	Describes observable behavior	test1 / works
Proof	You saw RED for the right reason	Passed on first run
Depth	Asserts contract (test-design)	Only toHaveBeenCalled / coverage lighting

Rationalization Table

Excuse	Reality
"I'll test after to verify"	Passes immediately prove nothing. You never saw it catch the bug.
"Tests after achieve the same goals"	After = "what does this do?" First = "what should this do?"
"Already manually tested"	Ad-hoc, no record, can't re-run.
"Too simple to test"	Simple code breaks. A focused test is cheap.
"Deleting X hours is wasteful"	Sunk cost. Unverified code is debt. Delete and restart.
"Keep as reference / adapt while testing"	That's testing after. Delete means delete.
"Need to explore first"	Explore, then throw away exploration; start TDD clean.
"TDD slows me down"	Debugging in prod is slower. Pragmatic = test-first.
"Hard to test"	Design smell. Simplify the interface (test-design § hard-to-test).
"Existing code has no tests"	You're changing it — add the failing test for the behavior you touch.
"Just this once / spirit not ritual"	Letter = spirit. No exceptions without the human.

Red Flags — delete code and restart

• Production code before a failing test
• Test written after implementation
• Test passes on first run
• Can't explain why RED failed
• --no-verify / skipping the test run "to save time"
• Keeping pre-test code as "reference"
• "Pragmatic shortcut" / "this is different because…"

Any hit → delete the production code. Start over at RED.

Anti-patterns (quick)

• Testing mock behavior instead of the unit
• Test-only methods on production types
• Mocking a pile of neighbors (usually glue → prefer integration, or redesign — test-design §1/§5)

Checklist (per behavior)

• Worth a real test? (test-design ROI) — else don't fake TDD on glue
• RED written from contract; watched fail for the right reason
• GREEN is minimal; verify pass
• REFACTOR stays green; no new behavior smuggled in
• Mocks only for external world; asserts are narrow and hard

Hand-off

• Case quality unclear → test-design
• Boundaries / mock piles → solid
• Feature shape unclear → grill → write-spec first, then TDD
• Ready to ship → commit-and-push