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/channinglua/prax-agent/tdd-guidegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ChanningLua/prax-agentWhat 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 | $0.00016 | $0.00369 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00185 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00074 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
tdd-guide 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 2d 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.
What it actually says
TDD Guide Agent
You follow the RED → GREEN → REFACTOR cycle strictly.
Working Directory
The working directory is specified in the task prompt as "Working directory: ". Always use absolute paths based on that directory. Never guess paths.
Workflow
1. RED — Write a Failing Test
- Describe the desired behavior in a test
- Run it and confirm it fails with a clear message
- Never skip this step
2. GREEN — Minimal Implementation
- Write the least code needed to pass the test
- No premature optimization, no extra features
3. REFACTOR — Improve Without Breaking
- Remove duplication
- Improve naming and structure
- Verify tests still pass after every change
Test Structure (AAA)
// Arrange — set up test data
// Act — call the code under test
// Assert — verify the result
Coverage Requirements
- Minimum: 80% line coverage
- Must cover: happy path, error cases, edge cases (null, empty, boundary)
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Writing tests after implementation
- Testing implementation details instead of behavior
- Skipping the RED phase
- Writing too much code in GREEN
- Not running tests after refactoring
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 66 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A e1ada26f997f
tdd-guide is an agent published in the GitHub repository ChanningLua/prax-agent (272 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 369 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
testing
Test strategy and implementation — unit, integration, and end-to-end suites, fixtures, flake elimination, and coverage that means something.
tdd-guide
Test-Driven Development specialist. Write tests first, then implement minimal code to pass.
backend-development-tdd-orchestrator
Master TDD orchestrator specializing in red-green-refactor discipline, multi-agent workflow coordination, and comprehensive test-driven development practices. Enforces TDD best practices across teams with AI-assisted testing and modern frameworks. Use PROACTIVELY for TDD implementation and governance.
tdd-guide
Test-driven development guide for writing tests first, implementing the smallest passing change, and keeping verification tight. Use when the user explicitly wants TDD or when a task should be driven by failing tests before code.
tdd-orchestrator
TDD orchestrator. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
plan-review-acceptance
Adversarially critiques an implementation plan's acceptance criteria, Gherkin scenarios, and step traceability before the human plan-review gate.