Oh-my-toong-playground testing
Use when writing tests, generating test skeletons, deciding mock strategies, learning test patterns, or understanding test levels. Triggers include "테스트 작성", "테스트 패턴", "mock 전략", "test skeleton".
git clone https://github.com/toongri/oh-my-toong-playground
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/toongri/oh-my-toong-playground "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/projects/loopers-kotlin-spring-template/skills/testing" ~/.claude/skills/toongri-oh-my-toong-playground-testing && rm -rf "$T"
projects/loopers-kotlin-spring-template/skills/testing/SKILL.mdTesting Skill
Test writing standards and quality guidelines following Classical TDD (state verification only).
Quick Reference
| Test Level | File Pattern | When to Use | External Deps |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unit | | Domain logic, value objects, pure functions | None |
| Integration | | Service + Repository, transactions | Real DB |
| Concurrency | | Locking, race conditions | Real DB |
| Adapter | | External API clients, queries | WireMock, Testcontainers |
| E2E | | Full API flow, auth | Full stack |
| Batch | | Spring Batch jobs | Real DB |
Core Philosophy
Tests serve three purposes: verify correctness, document behavior, and enable safe refactoring.
- Tests as Executable Documentation: Tests are the most accurate documentation because they're always up-to-date.
- Tests Enable Fearless Refactoring: With good tests, you can safely change implementation. But this only works if tests verify behavior, not implementation.
- Tests Reveal Design Problems: If a test is hard to write, that's feedback about your design.
The Iron Law
VERIFY STATE, NEVER INTERACTIONS. NO EXCEPTIONS. NO NEGOTIATIONS.
This applies to ALL tests:
- Not "except for simple utilities"
- Not "except when state verification is hard"
- Not "except when the team already uses verify()"
- Not "just this once"
Violating the letter of this rule IS violating the spirit.
🚨 Red Flags - STOP If You Think These
These thoughts mean you're rationalizing. STOP and reconsider:
| Thought | Reality |
|---|---|
| "This is too simple for BDD structure" | Simple code deserves consistent structure. Lower cost = less excuse. |
| "verify() is fine for external services" | Use WireMock/Adapter test. If impossible, it's design feedback. |
| "State verification is impossible here" | Redesign to return verifiable result. "Hard to test" = "bad design". |
| "This is just a utility class" | Utilities need BDD too. Consistency > convenience. |
| "It's overkill for this case" | Rules exist precisely for these "exception" moments. |
| "Factory method is boilerplate" | 5 minutes now saves hours of confusion later. |
| "Service has domain logic, needs Unit Test" | Domain logic belongs in Domain model. Service only orchestrates. |
| "Mock Unit Test is faster than Integration" | Speed is not the goal. Correct test level is. |
| "verify() is just extra insurance" | Any verify() use is forbidden. No "insurance" exceptions. |
| "Following the spirit, not the letter" | Violating the letter IS violating the spirit. No exceptions. |
| "Happy path + one failure is enough" | Boundaries and class edges are where bugs hide. Systematic coverage required. |
| "Any value in the valid range works" | Every test value must represent a named equivalence class. Arbitrary = untested. |
| "Too many combinations, test the main ones" | Document which combinations are skipped and why. Silent omission is a defect. |
| "BVA only applies to numeric types" | Boundaries exist in dates, string lengths, collection sizes. Apply BVA to all. |
| "Commenting test values is over-documenting" | If you can't name the class a value represents, you don't know why you chose it. |
| "@CsvSource rows exceed 8 while verifying conditions from 2+ independent responsibilities in a single test" | Eager Test anti-pattern. Split by responsibility so each test fails for exactly one reason. |
All of these mean: Follow the rules anyway.
Rationalization Table
Common excuses and why they're wrong:
| Excuse | Why It's Wrong | What To Do Instead |
|---|---|---|
| "verify() is the only way to test this" | WireMock, Testcontainers exist. Or redesign. | Use Adapter test pattern |
| "BDD structure is overhead for simple tests" | Consistency trumps perceived efficiency | Apply same structure everywhere |
| "Factory methods are boilerplate" | They're investment, not cost | Create factory with all defaults |
| "DRY - share setup between tests" | Test isolation > code reuse | Fresh fixtures per test |
| "State verified, verify() is extra safety" | ANY verify() usage is forbidden. No hybrids. | Remove verify(), state only |
| "Service does X, so Unit Test for X" | If X is domain logic, test Domain model | Unit Test Domain, Integration Service |
| "Mock is faster than real DB" | Speed < correctness. Mocks hide real bugs. | Use real DB via Integration Test |
| "One success + one failure covers it" | Boundaries between success/failure are untested | Apply BVA: boundary-1, boundary, boundary+1 |
| "ParameterizedTest values don't need explanation" | Every value must represent a named class | Comment which equivalence class each value covers |
| "Too many combinations, not practical" | Undocumented reduction = hidden risk | Apply Decision Table, document reduction rationale |
| "BVA is only for integers" | Dates, string lengths, prices all have boundaries | Apply BVA to any ordered/comparable type |
| "Test value comments clutter the code" | Unnamed values = arbitrary values = untested | Comment which equivalence class each value covers |
| "Verifying all combinations in one place is faster" | Eager Test anti-pattern. Separating by responsibility ensures each test fails for exactly one reason | Split @CsvSource by responsibility, one test per concern |
Handling Genuine Technical Limitations
If state verification appears technically impossible:
- Verify it's truly impossible — Can you redesign to return/expose verifiable state?
- If redesign is possible — Follow the rule. Redesign first, then test.
- If truly impossible — Document the limitation and propose a design change. Do not use verify() as a workaround.
CRITICAL: State/Result Verification ONLY (Classical TDD)
This project follows Classical TDD (Detroit School). All tests MUST verify outcomes, NOT interactions.
Verify WHAT happened, not HOW it happened.
✅ ALLOWED
assertThat(result).isEqualTo(expected) assertThat(point.balance).isEqualTo(700L) assertThatThrownBy { point.use(500L) }.isInstanceOf(CoreException::class.java)
❌ FORBIDDEN
verify(repository).save(any()) verify(mock, times(1)).method() verifyNoInteractions(mock) // ❌ ALSO FORBIDDEN: "Hybrid approach" - state + verify() assertThat(order.status).isEqualTo(OrderStatus.PLACED) // state verification ✅ verify(paymentClient).requestPayment(any()) // then verify ❌ STILL FORBIDDEN!
No "extra insurance" verify(): If you did state verification, you're done. Adding verify() for "safety" is still forbidden.
Test Level Overview
For level classification criteria, decision flow, and file naming conventions, see
references/test-level-guide.md
BDD Structure
Nested Classes
Use
@Nested per behavior (method/endpoint). No more than 1 level of nesting.
@Nested @DisplayName("use") inner class Use { // All cases for use() }
Naming Convention
: Korean description@DisplayName- Method name: English with backticks,
[result] when [condition]
Exception Naming Patterns
Two patterns for exception test names:
| Pattern | Korean (DisplayName) | English (Method name) |
|---|---|---|
| Specific Error Type | | |
| CoreException | | |
Examples:
// Specific Error Type - when the exception class name is descriptive @Test @DisplayName("잔액이 부족하면 InsufficientBalanceException 예외가 발생한다") fun `throws InsufficientBalanceException when balance is insufficient`() // CoreException - when using CoreException with ErrorType enum @Test @DisplayName("존재하지 않는 사용자면 NotFound CoreException 발생") fun `throws NotFound CoreException when user does not exist`() @Test @DisplayName("권한이 없으면 Forbidden CoreException 발생") fun `throws Forbidden CoreException when user has no permission`()
Given/When/Then
Every test must have comments specifying concrete values and expected results.
@Test @DisplayName("주문 금액이 올바르게 계산된다") fun `calculates total correctly`() { // given val initialBalance = 1000L val point = createPoint(balance = initialBalance) // when val deductAmount = 300L point.deduct(deductAmount) // then assertThat(point.balance).isEqualTo(initialBalance - deductAmount) }
Factory Method Pattern
Every test class must have private factory methods with all parameters defaulted.
// Unit Test: domain object creation private fun createPoint( id: Long = 0L, userId: Long = 1L, balance: Long = 1000L, status: PointStatus = PointStatus.ACTIVE, ): Point = Point.of(id, userId, balance, status) // Integration Test: includes DB persistence private fun createProduct( price: Money = Money.krw(10000), stockQuantity: Int = 100, ): Product { val brand = brandRepository.save(Brand.create("Test Brand")) val product = productRepository.save(Product.create(name = "Test Product", price = price, brand = brand)) stockRepository.save(Stock.create(product.id, stockQuantity)) return product }
Essential Rules
Expose Only What Matters
// ❌ Bad: What is this test about? val point = Point.of(id = 1L, userId = 42L, balance = 1000L, status = PointStatus.ACTIVE) // ✅ Good: Clearly about balance deduction val point = createPoint(balance = 1000L)
Single Logical Assertion
Each test verifies one behavior. Multiple
assertThat is fine if they verify aspects of the same result.
Meaningful Variable Names
// ❌ Bad assertThat(result).isEqualTo(700) // ✅ Good val initialBalance = 1000L val deductAmount = 300L assertThat(point.balance).isEqualTo(initialBalance - deductAmount)
Test Isolation
- No shared mutable state
- Database cleanup in
@AfterEach - No test interdependence
When to Skip Test Generation
Pure data objects with no behavior
- Command - use case input (e.g.,
)CreateOrderCommand - Event - immutable fact record (e.g.,
)OrderCreatedEvent - DTO / Request / Response - data transfer only
Infrastructure triggers with no business logic
- Scheduler -
methods that only invoke service methods@Scheduled- Scheduler's responsibility is only "when to call", not "what to do"
- Test the invoked service method instead (Integration Test)
- Cron expression correctness is Spring Framework's responsibility
References
Load references based on the current task. Each file provides detailed patterns and real code examples.
When determining test level
- Level classification criteria and decision flowreferences/test-level-guide.md
When generating test skeletons
- Spec to test skeleton process, quality checklistreferences/test-generation.md
When writing tests by level
- Unit test patterns (state change, validation, ParameterizedTest, domain events)references/unit-test.md
- Integration patterns (rollback, Spring Event, Kafka Consumer)references/integration-test.md
- Concurrency patterns (thread pool, locking, idempotency)references/concurrency-test.md
- Adapter patterns (WireMock, Circuit Breaker, Retry, complex queries)references/adapter-test.md
- E2E patterns (HTTP status codes, auth failures, API contract)references/e2e-test.md
- Spring Batch patterns (Processor unit test, Step/Job integration test)references/batch-test.md
When deciding external dependencies strategy
- External dependencies by test level (Real DB, WireMock, Testcontainers)references/external-dependencies.md
Common Mistakes
| Mistake | Why It's Wrong | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Interaction verification, not state | Assert on returned/persisted state |
| Shared mutable state between tests | Test pollution, flaky results | Create fresh fixtures per test |
| Testing implementation details | Breaks on refactor | Test observable behavior only |
| Magic numbers in assertions | Unclear what's being tested | Use named variables: |
| Multiple behaviors per test | Hard to diagnose failures | One logical assertion per test |
Missing cleanup | DB pollution across tests | Clean up created entities |
| Unit Test for pure delegation | Mock returns mock - no real testing | Skip Unit, write Integration Test instead |
| State + verify() hybrid | Any verify() is forbidden | Remove verify(), keep state verification only |