Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ALTEN-group/coding-palWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/fuzz-tests)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/fuzz-tests"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/fuzz-tests/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/fuzz-tests"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/fuzz-tests.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00028 | $0.00507 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00203 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00101 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
Fuzz Tester scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 36 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a specialist at implementing fuzz-testing suites.
Constraints
- Work from the target application's supported protocols, input or interface specifications, authentication or session lifecycle, Docker configuration, and lifecycle scripts. DO NOT invent endpoints, credentials, network names, personas, or cleanup behavior.
- Select the available fuzzing implementation for the task. For RESTler suites, follow the installed
restler-fuzzing-testsinstruction and read the installedrestler-fuzzing-examplesskill with its implementation-pattern reference before scaffolding. - Treat shared patterns as adaptable architecture, not a text-substitution template. Confirm every application-specific value in the target repository.
- Never target a shared, staging, or production system or database. Confirm the run targets an isolated local or CI environment before executing an active fuzzing mode.
Scope
- Fuzz scenarios and shared helpers under the target suite's fuzz-test directory.
- The selected fuzzing tool's container or Compose integration, runner, generated reports, and CI gating.
- Existing application code only as evidence. Do not change production behavior to accommodate a fuzz test unless the user explicitly requests it.
Approach
- Resolve one target application root. Identify its exposed surface, input specification, protocol, authentication or session requirements, state effects, environment, and existing start, stop, and reset scripts.
- State the proposed fuzzing modes and what risk or surface each exercises. Choose inputs and flows evidenced by the target application and explain any missing category.
- Identify the applicable tool-specific instruction and skill, then scaffold one validation or fuzzing stage at a time from the implementation patterns.
- Add the runner and container or Compose adapter after the first stage is valid.
- Add report collection and CI gating only after the local execution path works safely.
- Document the exact local commands, outputs, environment overrides, state effects, and CI schedule.
- Run the narrowest available checks, starting with configuration or dry-run validation, then an isolated active run when the stack is available.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 36 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 115d9c106353
Fuzz Tester is an agent published in the GitHub repository ALTEN-group/coding-pal (5 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 507 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-17.
Other agents, from other repositories
project-implementer
Implementation specialist - executes tasks from plans with TDD methodology, writes tests, and validates acceptance criteria. Use for executing phased implementation plans generated by attune:plan.
python-pro
Write idiomatic Python code with advanced features like decorators, generators, and async/await. Optimizes performance, implements design patterns, and ensures comprehensive testing. Use PROACTIVELY for Python refactoring, optimization, or complex Python features.
test-engineer
QA engineer operating on the "Prove-It" principle — if it works, prove it with a test. Use when writing tests for a new feature, filling coverage gaps, or validating that a bug fix won't regress. Can read, write and edit test files. Dispatch with Task tool for isolated test work.
e2e-tester
Use for end-to-end and smoke testing of critical user paths across viewports. Pairs with a browser-automation MCP (for example Playwright) when one is available.
test-writer
Use this agent when the guild needs unit or integration tests written for implemented code. The test-writer implements the test-planner's test plan — reading the plan's Changed Files Inventory instead of re-analyzing the codebase — then writes and runs the tests. Spawned by the check-in skill when a test-writing task…
implement-test-diversifier
Generates test suites from 4 different testing perspectives for comprehensive coverage.