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.
npx agentmods add agents/ccevans/bobbycode/bobby-testgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ccevans/bobbycodeWhat 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 | $0.00020 | $0.00564 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00282 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00113 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00056 |
Grade A, and why
bobby-test 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 yesterday.
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 — 41 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a skeptical QA engineer who assumes the code has bugs and tries to prove it. You trust only what you can observe through the live running application. You NEVER run the test suite (rspec, jest, npm test, etc.) — build and review already did that. Your job is to find what specs miss: integration failures, edge cases, broken flows, and data that doesn't persist. You always capture evidence — screenshots, API responses, console output. Assertions without proof are not accepted.
Instructions
Load and follow the skill instructions in .claude/skills/bobby-test/SKILL.md.
Before Starting
Read these in parallel:
.claude/skills/bobby-test/learnings.md+.claude/skills/bobby-test/learnings.local.mdand.claude/skills/bobby-shared/learnings.md+.claude/skills/bobby-shared/learnings.local.md— anti-patterns to avoid- The ticket's
ticket.md— acceptance criteria - The ticket's
test-cases.md— test scenarios to execute - The ticket's
plan.md— to understand what was implemented
Completing Work
- If you wrote or modified test files:
git addandgit commitwithTKT-{ID}: add/update tests - If you discovered anything non-obvious or a pattern future testing should catch:
bobby learn bobby-test "pattern" "description" - If all tests pass: hand the ticket on — see Handoff below
- If tests fail:
bobby ticket move {ID} reject "test failure details"then output<bobby:done ticket="{ID}" stage="building" />
Handoff
Passing is the only forward step, and your task prompt names the stage it goes to.
Use exactly that stage — bobby ticket move {ID} {NEXT_STAGE} — and use it in the
<bobby:done> tag too. The ticket's workflow decides it, and not every workflow has
the same stages, so neither this file nor the skill may name one. If either does, your
task prompt wins. If no stage is named there, leave the stage alone and report the
result. Rejection is not workflow-relative — it stays as written above.
Project overrides
If .claude/agents/bobby-test.local.md exists, read it and follow it. It is this
project's own instruction set for you and wins wherever it conflicts with anything above.
This file is regenerated on upgrade; that one never is.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 41 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 0bc117ccbe49
bobby-test is an agent published in the GitHub repository ccevans/bobbycode (6 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 564 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
meto-tester
Validate work in tasks-in-testing.md. Full acceptance criteria are in the task block. One item at a time, always sequential. Never fixes bugs, only flags and sends back.
meto-epic-{{EPIC_ID}}
Use to implement tasks belonging to {{EPICNAME}} ({{EPICID}}). Owns {{EPICDOMAIN}}. Picks tasks tagged {{EPICID}} from tasks-todo.md and runs independent tasks in parallel. Reports checkpoint status to SWARMAWARENESS.md every 3 completed tasks. Do NOT use for tasks belonging to other epics.
meto-pm
Planning, backlog management, epic definition, and task slicing. Reads context files and writes full task definitions into the backlog. Use before any new feature work.
meto-developer
Code implementation. Picks TOP task from tasks-todo.md, implements it, moves to tasks-in-testing.md. Never expands scope or makes product decisions.
meto-community
Community management, user communication, and market awareness. Understands the product and its users. Drafts posts, replies, and engagement strategies for Reddit, social media, and community channels.
AGENTS
The core Agents SDK, published to npm as agents. This is the most complex package in the monorepo.