provider-test-patterns
정보
이 스킬은 Terraform 공급자 개발자들에게 terraform-plugin-testing 프레임워크를 사용한 수용 테스트 작성 패턴과 지침을 제공합니다. 테스트 구조, 상태 확인 및 계획 확인 같은 주요 테스트 구성 요소와 가져오기 검증 및 임시 리소스 테스트를 포함한 일반적인 테스트 시나리오를 다룹니다. 공급자 수용 테스트를 작성, 검토 또는 디버깅할 때 이를 사용하여 모범 사례를 구현하세요.
빠른 설치
Claude Code
추천npx skills add hashicorp/agent-skills -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/hashicorp/agent-skillsgit clone https://github.com/hashicorp/agent-skills.git ~/.claude/skills/provider-test-patternsClaude Code에서 이 명령을 복사하여 붙여넣어 스킬을 설치하세요
문서
Provider Acceptance Test Patterns
Patterns for writing acceptance tests using terraform-plugin-testing with the Plugin Framework.
Source: HashiCorp Testing Patterns
References (load when needed):
references/checks.md— statecheck, plancheck, knownvalue types, tfjsonpath, comparersreferences/sweepers.md— sweeper setup, TestMain, dependenciesreferences/ephemeral.md— ephemeral resource testing, echoprovider, multi-step patterns
Test Lifecycle
The framework runs each TestStep through: plan → apply → refresh → final
plan. If the final plan shows a diff, the test fails (unless
ExpectNonEmptyPlan is set). After all steps, destroy runs followed by
CheckDestroy. This means every test automatically verifies that
configurations apply cleanly and produce no drift — no assertions needed for
that.
Test Function Structure
func TestAccExample_basic(t *testing.T) {
var widget example.Widget
rName := acctest.RandStringFromCharSet(10, acctest.CharSetAlphaNum)
resourceName := "example_widget.test"
resource.ParallelTest(t, resource.TestCase{
PreCheck: func() { testAccPreCheck(t) },
ProtoV6ProviderFactories: testAccProtoV6ProviderFactories,
CheckDestroy: testAccCheckExampleDestroy,
Steps: []resource.TestStep{
{
Config: testAccExampleConfig_basic(rName),
ConfigStateChecks: []statecheck.StateCheck{
stateCheckExampleExists(resourceName, &widget),
statecheck.ExpectKnownValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("name"), knownvalue.StringExact(rName)),
statecheck.ExpectKnownValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("id"), knownvalue.NotNull()),
},
},
},
})
}
Use resource.ParallelTest by default. Use resource.Test only when tests
share state or cannot run concurrently.
Provider Factory
// provider_test.go — Plugin Framework with Protocol 6 (use Protocol5 variant if needed)
var testAccProtoV6ProviderFactories = map[string]func() (tfprotov6.ProviderServer, error){
"example": providerserver.NewProtocol6WithError(New("test")()),
}
TestCase Fields
| Field | Purpose |
|---|---|
PreCheck | func() — verify prerequisites (env vars, API access) |
ProtoV6ProviderFactories | Plugin Framework provider factories |
CheckDestroy | TestCheckFunc — verify resources destroyed after all steps |
Steps | []TestStep — sequential test operations |
TerraformVersionChecks | []tfversion.TerraformVersionCheck — gate by CLI version |
TestStep Fields
Config Mode
| Field | Purpose |
|---|---|
Config | Inline HCL string to apply |
ConfigStateChecks | []statecheck.StateCheck — modern assertions (preferred) |
ConfigPlanChecks | resource.ConfigPlanChecks{PreApply: []plancheck.PlanCheck{...}} |
ExpectError | *regexp.Regexp — expect failure matching pattern |
ExpectNonEmptyPlan | bool — expect non-empty plan after apply |
PlanOnly | bool — plan without applying |
Destroy | bool — run destroy step |
PreConfig | func() — setup before step |
Import Mode
| Field | Purpose |
|---|---|
ImportState | true to enable import mode |
ImportStateVerify | Verify imported state matches prior state |
ImportStateVerifyIgnore | []string — attributes to skip during verify |
ImportStateKind | resource.ImportBlockWithID — import block generation |
ResourceName | Resource address to import |
ImportStateId | Override the ID used for import |
Check Functions
Modern: ConfigStateChecks (preferred)
Type-safe with aggregated error reporting. Compose built-in checks with custom
statecheck.StateCheck implementations. See references/checks.md for full
knownvalue types, tfjsonpath navigation, and comparers.
ConfigStateChecks: []statecheck.StateCheck{
stateCheckExampleExists(resourceName, &widget),
statecheck.ExpectKnownValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("name"), knownvalue.StringExact("my-widget")),
statecheck.ExpectKnownValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("enabled"), knownvalue.Bool(true)),
statecheck.ExpectKnownValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("id"), knownvalue.NotNull()),
statecheck.ExpectSensitiveValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("api_key")),
},
Do not mix Check (legacy) and ConfigStateChecks in the same step.
Legacy: Check (for CheckDestroy and migration)
CheckDestroy on TestCase requires TestCheckFunc. The Check field on
TestStep also accepts TestCheckFunc but prefer ConfigStateChecks for new
tests.
Check: resource.ComposeAggregateTestCheckFunc(
resource.TestCheckResourceAttr(name, "key", "expected"),
resource.TestCheckResourceAttrSet(name, "id"),
resource.TestCheckNoResourceAttr(name, "removed"),
resource.TestMatchResourceAttr(name, "url", regexp.MustCompile(`^https://`)),
resource.TestCheckResourceAttrPair(res1, "ref_id", res2, "id"),
),
ComposeAggregateTestCheckFunc reports all errors; ComposeTestCheckFunc
fails fast on the first.
Config Helpers
Use numbered format verbs — %[1]q for quoted strings, %[1]s for raw:
func testAccExampleConfig_basic(rName string) string {
return fmt.Sprintf(`
resource "example_widget" "test" {
name = %[1]q
}
`, rName)
}
func testAccExampleConfig_full(rName, description string) string {
return fmt.Sprintf(`
resource "example_widget" "test" {
name = %[1]q
description = %[2]q
enabled = true
}
`, rName, description)
}
Scenario Patterns
Basic + Update (combine in one test — updates are supersets of basic)
Steps: []resource.TestStep{
{
Config: testAccExampleConfig_basic(rName),
ConfigStateChecks: []statecheck.StateCheck{
stateCheckExampleExists(resourceName, &widget),
statecheck.ExpectKnownValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("name"), knownvalue.StringExact(rName)),
},
},
{
Config: testAccExampleConfig_full(rName, "updated"),
ConfigStateChecks: []statecheck.StateCheck{
stateCheckExampleExists(resourceName, &widget),
statecheck.ExpectKnownValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("description"), knownvalue.StringExact("updated")),
},
},
},
Import
After a config step, verify import produces identical state. Use
ImportStateKind for import block generation:
{
ResourceName: resourceName,
ImportState: true,
ImportStateVerify: true,
ImportStateKind: resource.ImportBlockWithID,
},
Disappears (resource deleted externally)
{
Config: testAccExampleConfig_basic(rName),
ConfigStateChecks: []statecheck.StateCheck{
stateCheckExampleExists(resourceName, &widget),
stateCheckExampleDisappears(resourceName),
},
ExpectNonEmptyPlan: true,
},
Validation (expect error)
{
Config: testAccExampleConfig_invalidName(""),
ExpectError: regexp.MustCompile(`name must not be empty`),
},
Regression (two-commit workflow)
A proper bug fix uses at least two commits: first commit the regression test (which fails, confirming the bug), then commit the fix (test passes). This lets reviewers independently verify the test reproduces the issue by checking out the first commit, then advancing to the fix.
Name and document regression tests to identify the issue they fix. Include a link to the original bug report when possible.
// TestAccExample_regressionGH1234 verifies fix for https://github.com/org/repo/issues/1234
func TestAccExample_regressionGH1234(t *testing.T) {
rName := acctest.RandStringFromCharSet(10, acctest.CharSetAlphaNum)
resourceName := "example_widget.test"
resource.ParallelTest(t, resource.TestCase{
PreCheck: func() { testAccPreCheck(t) },
ProtoV6ProviderFactories: testAccProtoV6ProviderFactories,
CheckDestroy: testAccCheckExampleDestroy,
Steps: []resource.TestStep{
{
// Reproduce the issue: this config triggered the bug
Config: testAccExampleConfig_regressionGH1234(rName),
ConfigStateChecks: []statecheck.StateCheck{
stateCheckExampleExists(resourceName, nil),
statecheck.ExpectKnownValue(resourceName,
tfjsonpath.New("computed_field"), knownvalue.NotNull()),
},
},
},
})
}
Helper Functions
Custom StateCheck: Exists
Implement statecheck.StateCheck for API existence verification. Separate the
exists check into its own function for reuse across steps — the source
recommends this as a design principle:
type exampleExistsCheck struct {
resourceAddress string
widget *example.Widget
}
func (e exampleExistsCheck) CheckState(ctx context.Context, req statecheck.CheckStateRequest, resp *statecheck.CheckStateResponse) {
r, err := stateResourceAtAddress(req.State, e.resourceAddress)
if err != nil {
resp.Error = err
return
}
id, ok := r.AttributeValues["id"].(string)
if !ok {
resp.Error = fmt.Errorf("no id found for %s", e.resourceAddress)
return
}
conn := testAccAPIClient()
widget, err := conn.GetWidget(id)
if err != nil {
resp.Error = fmt.Errorf("%s not found via API: %w", e.resourceAddress, err)
return
}
if e.widget != nil {
*e.widget = *widget
}
}
func stateCheckExampleExists(name string, widget *example.Widget) statecheck.StateCheck {
return exampleExistsCheck{resourceAddress: name, widget: widget}
}
Custom StateCheck: Disappears
Delete a resource via API to simulate external deletion:
type exampleDisappearsCheck struct {
resourceAddress string
}
func (e exampleDisappearsCheck) CheckState(ctx context.Context, req statecheck.CheckStateRequest, resp *statecheck.CheckStateResponse) {
r, err := stateResourceAtAddress(req.State, e.resourceAddress)
if err != nil {
resp.Error = err
return
}
id := r.AttributeValues["id"].(string)
conn := testAccAPIClient()
resp.Error = conn.DeleteWidget(id)
}
func stateCheckExampleDisappears(name string) statecheck.StateCheck {
return exampleDisappearsCheck{resourceAddress: name}
}
State Resource Lookup (shared utility)
func stateResourceAtAddress(state *tfjson.State, address string) (*tfjson.StateResource, error) {
if state == nil || state.Values == nil || state.Values.RootModule == nil {
return nil, fmt.Errorf("no state available")
}
for _, r := range state.Values.RootModule.Resources {
if r.Address == address {
return r, nil
}
}
return nil, fmt.Errorf("not found in state: %s", address)
}
Destroy Check (TestCheckFunc — required by CheckDestroy)
func testAccCheckExampleDestroy(s *terraform.State) error {
conn := testAccAPIClient()
for _, rs := range s.RootModule().Resources {
if rs.Type != "example_widget" {
continue
}
_, err := conn.GetWidget(rs.Primary.ID)
if err == nil {
return fmt.Errorf("widget %s still exists", rs.Primary.ID)
}
if !isNotFoundError(err) {
return err
}
}
return nil
}
PreCheck
func testAccPreCheck(t *testing.T) {
t.Helper()
if os.Getenv("EXAMPLE_API_KEY") == "" {
t.Fatal("EXAMPLE_API_KEY must be set for acceptance tests")
}
}
GitHub 저장소
연관 스킬
evaluating-llms-harness
테스팅이 Claude Skill은 MMLU, GSM8K를 포함한 60개 이상의 표준화된 학술 과제에서 LLM 성능을 벤치마크하기 위해 lm-evaluation-harness를 실행합니다. 개발자들이 모델 품질을 비교하고, 학습 진행 상황을 추적하거나 학술 결과를 보고할 수 있도록 설계되었습니다. 이 도구는 HuggingFace와 vLLM 모델을 포함한 다양한 백엔드를 지원합니다.
cloudflare-cron-triggers
테스팅이 스킬은 cron 표현식을 사용하여 Worker를 스케줄링하기 위한 Cloudflare Cron Triggers 구현에 관한 포괄적인 지식을 제공합니다. 주기적 작업, 유지보수 작업, 자동화된 워크플로우 설정 방법을 다루며, 잘못된 cron 표현식이나 시간대 문제 같은 일반적인 이슈들을 해결하는 방법을 포함합니다. 개발자들은 이를 통해 스케줄된 핸들러 구성, cron 트리거 테스트, Workflows 및 Green Compute와의 연동 작업을 수행할 수 있습니다.
webapp-testing
테스팅이 Claude Skill은 Python 스크립트를 통해 로컬 웹 애플리케이션을 테스트하기 위한 Playwright 기반 툴킷을 제공합니다. 프론트엔드 검증, UI 디버깅, 스크린샷 캡처, 로그 확인 기능을 지원하며 서버 라이프사이클을 관리합니다. 브라우저 자동화 작업에 사용하되 컨텍스트 오염을 방지하기 위해 소스 코드를 읽지 않고 스크립트를 직접 실행하세요.
finishing-a-development-branch
테스팅이 스킬은 테스트 통과를 확인한 후 체계적인 통합 옵션을 제시하여 개발자가 완성된 작업을 마무리하도록 돕습니다. 구현이 완료된 후 머지, PR 생성, 브랜치 정리와 같은 워크플로우를 안내합니다. 코드가 준비되고 테스트가 완료되었을 때 개발 프로세스를 체계적으로 마무리하기 위해 사용하세요.
