fix-flaky-tests
Fixes flaky tests by analyzing failure patterns from Tuist test insights, identifying root causes, and applying targeted corrections. Can be invoked with a specific test case URL (e.g. `https://tuist.dev/{account}/{project}/tests/test-cases/{id}`) or without arguments to discover and fix all flaky tests in the project.
What this skill does
# Fix Flaky Tests ## Quick Start You'll typically receive a Tuist test case URL or identifier. Follow these steps to investigate and fix it: 1. Run `tuist test case show <id-or-identifier> --json` to get reliability metrics for the test. 2. Run `tuist test case run list Module/Suite/TestCase --flaky --json` to see flaky run patterns. 3. Run `tuist test case run show <test-case-run-id> --json` on failing flaky runs to get failure messages and file paths. 4. Read the test source at the reported path and line, identify the flaky pattern, and fix it. 5. Verify by running the test multiple times to confirm it passes consistently. If no specific test is provided, start with the Discovery section below. ## Discovery When no specific test case is provided, find all flaky tests in the project: ```bash tuist test case list --flaky --json --page-size 50 ``` This returns all test cases currently flagged as flaky. Key fields: - `module.name` / `suite.name` / `name` — the test identifier - `avg_duration` — helps prioritize (fix fast unit tests first) - `is_quarantined` — whether the test is already quarantined **Triage strategy:** 1. Group tests by suite — multiple flaky tests in the same suite often share a root cause. 2. Check if failures share a `test_run_id` — tests that all failed in the same run may have been killed by a process crash, not individual test bugs. 3. Look at failure messages to categorize: test logic bugs vs infrastructure issues (network errors, server 502s, conflicts on retry). ## Investigation ### 1. Get test case metrics You can pass either the UUID or the `Module/Suite/TestCase` identifier: ```bash tuist test case show <id> --json tuist test case show Module/Suite/TestCase --json ``` Key fields: - `reliability_rate` — percentage of successful runs (higher is better) - `flakiness_rate` — percentage of runs marked flaky in the last 30 days - `total_runs` / `failed_runs` — volume context - `last_status` — current state ### 2. View flaky run history ```bash tuist test case run list Module/Suite/TestCase --flaky --json ``` The identifier uses the format `ModuleName/SuiteName/TestCaseName` or `ModuleName/TestCaseName` when there is no suite. This returns only runs that were detected as flaky. ### 3. View full run history ```bash tuist test case run list Module/Suite/TestCase --json --page-size 20 ``` Look for patterns: - Does it fail on specific branches? - Does it fail only on CI (`is_ci: true`) or also locally? - Are failures clustered around specific commits? ### 4. Get failure details ```bash tuist test case run show <test-case-run-id> --json ``` Key fields: - `failures[].message` — the assertion or error message - `failures[].path` — source file path - `failures[].line_number` — exact line of failure - `failures[].issue_type` — type of issue (assertion_failure, etc.) - `repetitions` — if present, shows retry behavior (pass/fail sequence) - `test_run_id` — the broader test run this execution belongs to - `crash_report` — crash report data (present when the test runner crashed); contains `exception_type`, `signal`, `exception_subtype`, and `triggered_thread_frames` ## Code Analysis 1. Open the file at `failures[0].path` and go to `failures[0].line_number`. 2. Read the full test function and its setup/teardown. 3. Identify which of the common flaky patterns below applies. 4. Check if the test shares state with other tests in the same suite. ## Common Flaky Patterns ### Timing and async issues - **Missing waits**: Test checks a result before an async operation completes. Fix: use `await`, expectations with timeouts, or polling. - **Race conditions**: Multiple concurrent operations access shared state. Fix: synchronize access or use serial queues. - **Hardcoded timeouts**: `sleep(1)` or fixed delays that are too short on CI. Fix: use condition-based waits instead of fixed delays. ### Shared state - **Test pollution**: One test modifies global/static state that another test depends on. Fix: reset state in setUp/tearDown or use unique instances per test. - **Singleton contamination**: Shared singletons carry state between tests. Fix: inject dependencies or reset singletons. - **File system leftovers**: Tests leave files that affect subsequent runs. Fix: use temporary directories and clean up. ### Environment dependencies - **Network calls**: Tests hit real services that may be slow or unavailable. Fix: mock network calls. - **Date/time sensitivity**: Tests depend on current time or timezone. Fix: inject a clock or freeze time. - **File system paths**: Hardcoded paths that differ between environments. Fix: use relative paths or temp directories. ### Order dependence - **Implicit ordering**: Test passes only when run after another test that sets up required state. Fix: make each test self-contained. - **Parallel execution conflicts**: Tests that work in isolation but fail when run concurrently. Fix: use unique resources per test. ### Crashes (identified via `crash_report`) - `EXC_BREAKPOINT` / `SIGTRAP` — force-unwrap of nil, Swift precondition failure - `EXC_BAD_ACCESS` / `SIGSEGV` — use-after-free or dangling pointer - `EXC_CRASH` / `SIGABRT` — uncaught Objective-C exception ## Fix Implementation After identifying the pattern: 1. Apply the smallest fix that addresses the root cause. 2. Do not refactor unrelated code. 3. If the fix requires a test utility (like a mock or helper), check if one already exists before creating a new one. ## Verification ### Running tests repeatedly Run the specific test repeatedly until failure using `xcodebuild`'s built-in repetition support: ```bash xcodebuild test -workspace <workspace> -scheme <scheme> -only-testing <module>/<suite>/<test> -test-iterations <count> -run-tests-until-failure ``` This runs the test up to `<count>` times and stops at the first failure. Choose the iteration count based on how long the test takes — for fast unit tests use 50–100, for slower integration or acceptance tests use 2–5. ### Reproducing before fixing Before applying a fix, try to reproduce the flaky failure locally. A successful reproduction confirms your root cause analysis and lets you verify the fix directly. Use the "Running tests repeatedly" approach above, or the race condition strategies below if concurrency is suspected. Some flaky scenarios — especially race conditions, CI-specific timing issues, or environment-dependent failures — may be difficult or impossible to reproduce locally. If you cannot reproduce after reasonable effort, proceed with fixing based on code analysis and failure logs. A fix backed by clear evidence of a bug (e.g. unsynchronized shared state, TOCTOU pattern) is valid even without local reproduction. ### Reproducing race conditions Race conditions and concurrency bugs often only manifest under CI-level parallelism and are hard to reproduce locally. Try these strategies in order: 1. **Increase parallelism**: Add `-parallel-testing-enabled YES` to run test suites concurrently. 2. **Run broader test suites**: Instead of running a single test, run the entire module (e.g. `-only-testing ModuleTests`) to increase contention on shared resources. 3. **Thread Sanitizer**: Run with TSan enabled to detect data races deterministically. Note: TSan adds overhead which can change timing, so some races may not trigger under TSan. ```bash xcodebuild test -workspace <workspace> -scheme <scheme> -only-testing <module> -enableThreadSanitizer YES ``` 4. **High iteration count with broad scope**: Combine all the above — run the full module with parallelism and many iterations. If a race condition cannot be reproduced locally but the code is provably thread-unsafe (e.g. unsynchronized mutation of shared state), the fix is still valid. Verify the fix by confirming the tests pass with the same reproduction strategies above. Document in the commit message that the fix addresses a CI-only race condition identified through code analysis and failure logs. ## Done Checklist -
Related in Code Review
gstack
IncludedFast headless browser for QA testing and site dogfooding. Navigate pages, interact with elements, verify state, diff before/after, take annotated screenshots, test responsive layouts, forms, uploads, dialogs, and capture bug evidence. Use when asked to open or test a site, verify a deployment, dogfood a user flow, or file a bug with screenshots. (gstack)
startup-due-diligence
IncludedLegal due diligence review for seed-stage and Series A startups (US, Delaware C-Corp focus). Supports both investor and founder perspectives. Capabilities include: (1) Interactive document review and issue spotting; (2) Document request list generation; (3) Cap table and SAFE/convertible note analysis; (4) Red flag identification with severity ratings; (5) Diligence report generation. TRIGGERS: due diligence, DD, startup investment, cap table review, Series A, seed round, investor diligence, legal review startup, SAFE analysis, convertible note, 409A, founder vesting.
interview-master
IncludedThis skill should be used when the user asks to "generate interview questions", "prepare for interview", "optimize resume", "conduct mock interview", "analyze git commits for resume", "generate resume from code", "review my resume", or mentions interview preparation, career assistance, or extracting project experience from git history. Provides comprehensive interview and career development guidance for both job seekers and interviewers.
fix-issue
IncludedFixes GitHub issues using parallel analysis agents for root cause investigation, code exploration, and regression detection. Reads issue context from gh CLI, searches codebase and memory for related patterns, generates a fix with tests, and links the resolution back to the issue via PR. Includes prevention analysis to avoid recurrence. Use when debugging errors, resolving regressions, fixing bugs, or triaging issues.
sf-apex
IncludedGenerates and reviews Salesforce Apex code with 150-point scoring. TRIGGER when: user writes, reviews, or fixes Apex classes, triggers, test classes, batch/queueable/schedulable jobs, or touches .cls/.trigger files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: LWC JavaScript (use sf-lwc), Flow XML (use sf-flow), SOQL-only queries (use sf-soql), or non-Salesforce code.
swift-development
IncludedComprehensive Swift development for building, testing, and deploying iOS/macOS applications. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Build Swift packages or Xcode projects from command line, (2) Run tests with XCTest or Swift Testing framework, (3) Manage iOS simulators with simctl, (4) Handle code signing, provisioning profiles, and app distribution, (5) Format or lint Swift code with SwiftFormat/SwiftLint, (6) Work with Swift Package Manager (SPM), (7) Implement Swift 6 concurrency patterns (async/await, actors, Sendable), (8) Create SwiftUI views with MVVM architecture, (9) Set up Core Data or SwiftData persistence, or any other Swift/iOS/macOS development tasks.