Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
前端设计可写文件github未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

javascript-unit-testingJavaScript unit 测试

Agent Skill

用于辅助 Java 项目开发、面向对象设计、Spring 生态、Maven 或 Gradle 依赖和后端工程实践。它适合让 Agent 分析类结构、设计接口、整理服务分层、生成测试或检查常见代码坏味道。使用时需要结合项目已有架构、包结构和依赖版本,不应只按通用教程改代码;涉及数据库、事务、并发或框架配置时,应先确认运行环境和回归测试范围。

总安装

635

周安装

27

GitHub Stars

8

下载量

222
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

3

许可证

MIT

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:javascript-unit-testing(JavaScript unit 测试)
来源仓库:https://github.com/el-feo/ai-context
仓库路径:skills/javascript-unit-testing
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/el-feo/ai-context --skill javascript-unit-testing
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/el-feo/ai-context --skill javascript-unit-testing

简介

专注 JavaScript 单元测试编写与 Mock 策略指导。

  • 适用于函数级逻辑验证与依赖隔离。javascript-unit-testing 属于前端设计类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。
  • 使用时应优先测试公共接口而非内部实现。
  • 建议结合覆盖率报告持续优化测试集。
  • 安装方式:从 AI 上下文库获取,支持多种测试框架适配。

SKILL.md

JavaScript Unit Testing

Expert guidance for writing maintainable, trustworthy unit tests in JavaScript and TypeScript using Jest. Based on "The Art of Unit Testing, Third Edition" by Roy Osherove with Vladimir Khorikov (Manning, 2024).

Instructions

When helping users with unit testing:

  1. Understand the context: Identify if they're writing new tests, fixing existing ones, or learning concepts
  2. Apply core principles: Focus on readability, maintainability, and trust in tests
  3. Use appropriate patterns: Select the right testing pattern based on exit point type (return value, state change, or third-party call)
  4. Provide examples: Show concrete code examples following best practices
  5. Reference supporting documentation: Point to references/REFERENCE.md for detailed concepts and references/EXAMPLES.md for more code samples

Core Concepts

Unit of Work

A unit of work is all actions between an entry point (function/method we trigger) and one or more exit points (observable results).

Three types of exit points:

  1. Return value - Function returns a useful value
  2. State change - Observable change in system state
  3. Third-party call - Calling external dependency (logger, database, API)

Good Unit Test Properties

Must have:

  • Fast execution (milliseconds)
  • Fully isolated from other tests
  • Consistent results (no flakiness)
  • Runs in memory (no filesystem, network, database)
  • Clear intent and easy to read

Avoid:

  • Logic in tests (if/else, loops, try/catch)
  • Multiple concerns per test
  • Shared state between tests
  • Testing implementation details vs behavior

Quick Start: Writing Your First Test

Basic Test Structure (AAA Pattern)

test('sum with two numbers returns their sum', () => {
  // Arrange - set up test data
  const input = '1,2';

  // Act - call the unit of work
  const result = sum(input);

  // Assert - verify the outcome
  expect(result).toBe(3);
});

Test Naming (USE Pattern)

Format: [U]nit, [S]cenario, [E]xpectation

// Good examples
test('sum, with two valid numbers, returns their sum', () => { ... });
test('verify, with no uppercase letter, returns false', () => { ... });
test('save, during maintenance window, throws exception', () => { ... });

Organizing Tests

describe('Password Verifier', () => {
  describe('one uppercase rule', () => {
    test('given no uppercase, returns false', () => {
      const verifier = makeVerifier([oneUpperCaseRule]);
      expect(verifier.verify('abc')).toBe(false);
    });

    test('given one uppercase, returns true', () => {
      const verifier = makeVerifier([oneUpperCaseRule]);
      expect(verifier.verify('Abc')).toBe(true);
    });
  });
});

Use factory methods instead of beforeEach() to avoid scroll fatigue and keep tests self-contained.

Testing Different Exit Points

Return Value Testing (Easiest)

test('processes input and returns result', () => {
  const result = calculateTotal([10, 20, 30]);
  expect(result).toBe(60);
});

State-Based Testing

test('adds item to cart and updates count', () => {
  const cart = new ShoppingCart();

  cart.addItem('apple');

  expect(cart.itemCount()).toBe(1);
  expect(cart.contains('apple')).toBe(true);
});

Interaction Testing (Use Sparingly)

Only for testing third-party calls (exit points):

test('save calls logger with correct message', () => {
  const mockLogger = { info: jest.fn() };
  const repository = new Repository(mockLogger);

  repository.save({ id: 1, name: 'test' });

  expect(mockLogger.info).toHaveBeenCalledWith('Saved item 1');
});

Important: Use mocks only for exit points. Have one mock per test maximum. Most tests (95%+) should be return-value or state-based.

Breaking Dependencies

When to Break Dependencies

Break dependencies when code relies on:

  • Time (Date.now(), moment())
  • Random values (Math.random())
  • Network calls (fetch, axios)
  • Filesystem (fs.readFile)
  • Databases
  • External services

Dependency Injection Patterns

1. Parameter Injection (Simplest)

// Before - time dependency baked in
const verify = (input) => {
  const day = moment().day(); // Hard to test!
  if (day === 0 || day === 6) throw Error("Weekend!");
};

// After - time injected
const verify = (input, currentDay) => {
  if (currentDay === 0 || currentDay === 6) throw Error("Weekend!");
};

// Test with full control
test('on weekends, throws exception', () => {
  expect(() => verify('input', 0)).toThrow("Weekend!");
});

2. Functional Injection

const verify = (logger) => (input) => {
  logger.info('Verifying');
  return input.length > 5;
};

// Test
test('verify logs attempt', () => {
  const stubLogger = { info: jest.fn() };
  const verifyFn = verify(stubLogger);
  verifyFn('password');
});

3. Constructor Injection (OOP)

class Verifier {
  constructor(private logger: ILogger) {}

  verify(input: string): boolean {
    this.logger.info('Verifying');
    return true;
  }
}

// Test
test('verify calls logger', () => {
  const mockLogger = { info: jest.fn() };
  const verifier = new Verifier(mockLogger);
  verifier.verify('input');
  expect(mockLogger.info).toHaveBeenCalled();
});

Stubs vs Mocks

Stubs (incoming dependencies):

  • Provide fake data/behavior INTO the unit
  • Do NOT assert against them
  • Can have many per test

Mocks (outgoing dependencies):

  • Represent exit points
  • DO assert they were called correctly
  • Should have ONE per test
// Stub - provides data IN
const stubDatabase = {
  getUser: () => ({ id: 1, name: 'John' })
};

// Mock - verifies calls OUT
const mockLogger = {
  info: jest.fn()
};

test('getUserName retrieves name from database and logs', () => {
  const service = new UserService(stubDatabase, mockLogger);

  const name = service.getUserName(1);

  expect(name).toBe('John'); // Return value assertion
  expect(mockLogger.info).toHaveBeenCalledWith('Retrieved user 1'); // Mock assertion
});

Testing Asynchronous Code

Extract Entry Point Pattern

Extract pure logic from async operations:

// Before - everything mixed
const isWebsiteAlive = async () => {
  const resp = await fetch('http://example.com');
  if (!resp.ok) throw resp.statusText;
  const text = await resp.text();
  return text.includes('illustrative')
    ? { success: true }
    : { success: false, status: 'missing text' };
};

// After - extract testable logic
const processFetchContent = (text) => {
  return text.includes('illustrative')
    ? { success: true }
    : { success: false, status: 'missing text' };
};

// Fast, synchronous unit test
test('with good content, returns success', () => {
  const result = processFetchContent('illustrative');
  expect(result.success).toBe(true);
});

Extract Adapter Pattern

Wrap async dependencies behind testable interfaces:

// network-adapter.js - wrapper for fetch
const fetchUrlText = async (url) => {
  const resp = await fetch(url);
  return resp.ok
    ? { ok: true, text: await resp.text() }
    : { ok: false, text: resp.statusText };
};

// website-verifier.js - inject adapter
const isWebsiteAlive = async (network) => {
  const result = await network.fetchUrlText('http://example.com');
  if (!result.ok) throw result.text;
  return result.text.includes('illustrative');
};

// Test with fake adapter (synchronous!)
test('with good content, returns true', async () => {
  const fakeNetwork = {
    fetchUrlText: () => ({ ok: true, text: 'illustrative' })
  };
  const result = await isWebsiteAlive(fakeNetwork);
  expect(result).toBe(true);
});

Testing Timers

test('calls callback after delay', () => {
  jest.useFakeTimers();
  const callback = jest.fn();

  delayedGreeting(callback);

  expect(callback).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
  jest.advanceTimersByTime(1000);
  expect(callback).toHaveBeenCalledWith('hello');

  jest.useRealTimers();
});

Common Antipatterns to Avoid

  1. Logic in tests - No if/else, loops, or try/catch
  2. Multiple mocks per test - One exit point per test
  3. Asserting against stubs - Only assert against mocks
  4. beforeEach() overuse - Use factory methods instead
  5. Testing private methods - Test through public API
  6. Overspecification - Don't test implementation details
  7. Flaky tests - Inject all dependencies for consistency
  8. Shared state - Keep tests fully isolated
  9. Integration tests as unit tests - Use real dependencies sparingly
  10. No test naming convention - Follow USE pattern

Test Quality Checklist

Can you answer YES to all these?

  • ✓ Tests run in under a few minutes (ideally seconds)?
  • ✓ Any team member can run tests on any machine?
  • ✓ Tests give same results every time (no flakiness)?
  • ✓ Tests work without network, database, or filesystem?
  • ✓ One test failure doesn't affect other tests?
  • ✓ Test names clearly explain what they verify?
  • ✓ Tests are easy to read and understand?
  • ✓ When tests fail, you know exactly what broke?

If NO to any → Review the corresponding section in references/REFERENCE.md

Examples

For comprehensive code examples covering all patterns and scenarios, see references/EXAMPLES.md.

Resources

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

04

需要参考平台分布和安装热度时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Claude Code

26.06%
按下载量换算58

Gemini CLI

23.4%
按下载量换算52

Antigravity

18.75%
按下载量换算42

windsurf

12.93%
按下载量换算29

github-copilot

7.42%
按下载量换算16

Codex

3.67%
按下载量换算8

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

可写文件

该 Skill 可能写入或修改本地文件,使用前需要确认目标目录和修改范围。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills