git:20261013.393d1c4 to git:20261019.f96a1e6

---

name: test-audit

description: >

Garden the test suite by finding and removing redundant, vacuous, or

implementation-coupled tests while preserving useful regression coverage.

Use for test audits, test pruning, duplicate coverage, or reducing CI test

cost. Supports focused cleanups and coordinated audit campaigns.

---

# Test Audit

Reduce execution and maintenance cost while preserving meaningful failure

detection. Investigate aggressively; delete only with evidence. Retaining an

area after review is a valid result. This skill is self-contained; upstream

attribution is in [NOTICE.md](NOTICE.md).

## Choose the scope

- Focused cleanup: follow this entry point and read the

[candidate evidence guide](references/audit.md) before editing.

- Multiple owners, agents, or PRs: also read [CAMPAIGN.md](CAMPAIGN.md). Declare

whether the work is a targeted sweep or an exhaustive subsystem audit.

- Validation and cost claims: read [references/validation.md](references/validation.md).

- Paperclip commands, invariants, and delivery: read

[references/paperclip.md](references/paperclip.md) alongside repository instructions.

## Decision gate

For every proposed removal, answer:

1. Which observable contract and plausible regression do the assertions cover?

2. Which retained file/case detects that regression through the responsible

production code? Otherwise, why is the assertion vacuous or contract retired?

3. Does this candidate uniquely cover a transport, permission, lifecycle,

storage boundary, platform, default, or other independent failure mode?

4. What improves: executions, fixtures, processes, maintenance, or runtime?

Prefer the smallest test that reaches the code responsible for the contract.

A broader suite is not automatically stronger proof. Similarity, size, slowness,

or suspected AI authorship alone never justify deletion.

## Prevent new duplication

Apply this gate to tests added or changed during gardening:

- Name the regression that existing proof misses. Extend an appropriate owner

or table before adding another suite; another layer needs a distinct risk.

- Exercise the responsible production behavior. Do not add a mock that supplies

the result being asserted or a production hook solely for convenient testing.

- Check observable outcomes that survive behavior-preserving refactors. A

negative case must reach its named guard with otherwise valid inputs.

## Focused workflow

1. **Inspect:** pin the base; read candidates, keepers, fixtures, production

callers, history, and CI routing. Preserve unrelated work.

2. **Plan:** mark retain, repair, consolidate, delete, or defer. Name remaining

proof and assertions to move; look for redundant suites as well as cases.

3. **Prove:** establish the affected baseline locally or from matching-revision

CI. Diagnose failures before treating them as cleanup candidates.

4. **Edit:** move unique assertions first, then retire duplicates and unused

support. Production-seam deletion needs its own caller/contract evidence.

5. **Validate:** run keepers and affected siblings, verify selection, and apply

the validation guide's intended-failure controls where needed.

6. **Review:** reconcile deleted contracts with retained proof. Publish or merge

only within the task's authorization.

## Completion and reporting

Report removals and keepers, retained/deferred candidates, checks and limitations,

distinct cases versus repeated executions, and test/support versus production

State the actual endpoint: findings, validated local patch, published PR,

intermediate merge, or landed in the intended target. Stop at the requested

scope/time limit or completed delivery, not a deletion quota. For another pass,

refresh the base and prior findings; revisit retained tests only with new evidence.