diff --git a/1-js/03-code-quality/05-testing-mocha/3-pow-test-wrong/solution.md b/1-js/03-code-quality/05-testing-mocha/3-pow-test-wrong/solution.md
@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
-The test demonstrates one of the temptations a developer meets when writing tests.

-What we have here is actually 3 tests, but layed out as a single function with 3 asserts.

-Sometimes it's easier to write this way, but if an error occurs, it's much less obvious what went wrong.

-If an error happens in the middle of a complex execution flow, then we'll have to figure out the data at that point. We'll actually have to *debug the test*.

-It would be much better to break the test into multiple `it` blocks with clearly written inputs and outputs.

-Like this:
```js
describe("Raises x to power n", function() {
  it("5 in the power of 1 equals 5", function() {
@@ -25,9 +25,9 @@ describe("Raises x to power n", function() {
});
```

-We replaced the single `it` with `describe` and a group of `it` blocks. Now if something fails we would see clearly what the data was.

-Also we can isolate a single test and run it in standalone mode by writing `it.only` instead of `it`:


```js

diff --git a/1-js/03-code-quality/05-testing-mocha/3-pow-test-wrong/task.md b/1-js/03-code-quality/05-testing-mocha/3-pow-test-wrong/task.md
@@ -2,9 +2,9 @@ importance: 5

---

-# What's wrong in the test?

-What's wrong in the test of `pow` below?

```js
it("Raises x to the power n", function() {
@@ -20,5 +20,4 @@ it("Raises x to the power n", function() {
  assert.equal(pow(x, 3), result);
});
```
-
-P.S. Syntactically the test is correct and passes.