All case studies

TestKit.

AI-Native Software Delivery & Verification System

Reusable Agent Skills and deterministic verification workflows that connect requirements, TestSpec, execution, defect regression and acceptance evidence.

Area
Verification
Implementation focus
Reusable Agent Skills, test specifications, execution contracts and deterministic validators.
What you can inspect
Explore the evidence workflow, including the conditions that keep an acceptance result open.

A verification chain you can inspect.

Select a stage to inspect its inputs, responsibilities, artifacts and validation rules.

From requirement to acceptanceInteractive guide

Requirement

testspec-new / testspec-update
Input
Current requirements, product answers and acceptance rules.
What the Agent Skill does
Establish the product baseline, resolve scope and record questions that still need a human answer.
Artifact
Requirement document and change context.
How it is verified
Check requirement identity, version and authority. Unanswered questions remain explicit.
Next dependency
TestSpec consumes the confirmed requirement baseline, not an inferred implementation goal.
Read the source contract

This is an explanation of the workflow, not a live test run. Defect / regression verification applies when a failure or repair needs investigation.

The problem

AI coding can produce changes quickly, but a completed task or green test does not explain which requirements were checked, on which build, or with what evidence. A reusable verification layer makes those relationships explicit.

How the pieces fit

This diagram explains TestKit’s evidence workflow. Stages are inspectable concepts, not a claim that a live test run is happening in this browser. Defect / regression work is conditional on failures or repair verification.

Key engineering decisions

Package methods as reusable Agent Skills

Requirements analysis, TestSpec design, API and cross-platform execution share reviewable contracts. A coding agent loads the appropriate workflow instead of improvising a new testing process for every task.

Freeze scope before execution

The source requirements or cases, build identity, environment and required checks form the execution baseline. Results retain every attempt so retries cannot erase a previous failure.

Keep product intent authoritative

Current requirements and confirmed product answers lead TestSpec. Code and historical cases are calibration evidence; they do not silently redefine the acceptance criteria.

Compute conclusions from evidence

Deterministic validators check coverage, source identity and current targets. A successful defect retest is distinct from a fresh acceptance run across all required checks.

Reliability & failure handling

Stale evidence stays historical

When requirements or the tested build change, earlier evidence is marked stale for the current target. The affected scope must be frozen and executed again.

Reproduce the actual failure

RED must demonstrate the defect signature. DNS, installation or account failures are blockers—not successful reproduction. GREEN and REGRESSION require comparable conditions.

Local checks have a local scope

The repository’s unified Python check runs packaging, contracts, synthetic evaluations and unit tests. Real devices, external APIs and full acceptance need their own authorized execution and evidence.

Evidence & scope

Source links are pinned to the reviewed revision so you can follow each implementation detail.

What this case establishes

A delivery and verification capability layer for coding agents. Devices, business accounts and runtime tools are provided by the authorized host environment.

Continue exploringCoding Agent