Covers testing strategies for string manipulation, calculations, collections, data validation, and format utilities with edge case and boundary condition handling
Uses AssertJ assertions for readable test code and @ParameterizedTest for testing multiple similar scenarios efficiently
Emphasizes null handling, empty inputs, extreme values, and floating-point precision as critica
Fetches unit-test-utility-methods from giuseppe-trisciuoglio/developer-kit and configures it for Cursor.
3
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
◆ Which agents do you want to install to?
│
│ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ────────────────
│ · Cline · Codex · Goose · Windsurf
│ ●Cursor(selected)
│ · Cursor · Aider · Continue
4
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
.cursor/skills/unit-test-utility-methods
Restart Cursor to activate unit-test-utility-methods. Access via /unit-test-utility-methods in your agent's command palette.
⚠
Security Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
This skill generates tests for utility classes with static helper methods and pure functions. It provides patterns for testing null handling, edge cases, boundary conditions, and common utilities like string manipulation, calculations, data validation, and collections. Pure functions require no mocking.
When to Use
Use this skill when:
Writing tests for utility/helper classes with static methods
Testing pure functions with no state or side effects
Testing string manipulation, formatting, or transformation utilities
Testing calculation, conversion, or math helper functions
Testing data validation and formatter utilities
Verifying null/empty input handling in utility code
Testing collections or array helper methods
Instructions
Create test class: Name it after the utility (e.g., StringUtilsTest)
Test happy path: Valid inputs with expected outputs
Test edge cases: null, empty, whitespace, single elements
Test boundary conditions: max/min values, large numbers, precision
Use descriptive names: shouldCapitalizeFirstLetter instead of test1
Use AssertJ: For readable, chainable assertions
Use @ParameterizedTest: For multiple similar inputs (see references/parameterized-tests.md)
classCollectionUtilsTest{@TestvoidshouldFilterList(){List<Integer> result =CollectionUtils.filter(List.of(1,2,3,4), n -> n %2
Implementation Guide
Prerequisites
›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
›Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
›Willingness to iterate and refine outputs
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
1Install skill using provided installation command
2Test with simple use case relevant to your work
3Evaluate output quality and relevance
4Iterate on prompts to improve results
5Integrate into regular workflow if valuable
Common Pitfalls
⚠Expecting perfect results without iteration
⚠Not providing enough context in prompts
⚠Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
⚠Accepting outputs without review and validation
Best Practices
✓ Do
+Start with clear, specific prompts
+Provide relevant context and constraints
+Review and refine all outputs before using
+Iterate to improve output quality
+Document successful prompt patterns
✗ Don't
−Don't use without understanding skill limitations
−Don't skip validation of outputs
−Don't share sensitive information in prompts
−Don't expect skill to replace human judgment
💡 Pro Tips
★Be specific about desired format and style
★Ask for multiple options to choose from
★Request explanations to understand reasoning
★Combine AI efficiency with human expertise
When to Use This
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
Learning Path
1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
