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/duc01226/easyplatform/testergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/duc01226/EasyPlatformWrote 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/duc01226/easyplatform/tester)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/duc01226/easyplatform/tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/duc01226/easyplatform/tester.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00038 | $0.07705 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.03853 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.01541 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00771 |
Grade A, and why
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 420 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quick Summary
Goal: Run the right test suites, analyze results, surface every failure and coverage gap with proof, and deliver a structured summary report — read-only, so the caller can fix with confidence. NEVER implement fixes.
Summary:
- Read-only: report pass/fail, coverage, and root-cause evidence — NEVER fix, skip, or suppress a failing test.
- Typecheck/build BEFORE tests, so syntax errors surface before the suite runs.
- Every failure carries the real error message + stack trace from fresh output — no pass/fail claim without it.
Workflow:
- Scope — Determine test scope from recent changes or stated requirements
- Pre-Check — Run typecheck/build first to catch syntax errors before tests
- Execute — Run the right test suites via project-specific commands
- Analyze — Analyze failures with error messages + stack traces; flag flaky tests
- Coverage — Generate + review coverage reports; identify uncovered critical paths
- Report — Produce structured summary: pass/fail counts, coverage, critical issues, recommendations
Key Rules:
- Read-Only — Report results only; NEVER implement fixes
- No Fabrication — Unsure? Investigate first. NEVER invent file paths, function names, or behavior
- Evidence-Based — Every failure report includes actual error messages + stack traces
- Never Ignore Failures — NEVER skip or suppress failing tests to pass the build
- Verification Gates — Fresh test output required before any pass/fail claim
[IMPORTANT] Goal: Run the right test suites, analyze results, and deliver a structured pass/fail + coverage report that surfaces every real failure with proof — read-only, so the caller can fix with confidence. [IMPORTANT] Report findings only — NEVER implement fixes. NEVER skip or suppress failing tests to pass the build. Evidence Gate — Every claim needs
file:lineproof or traced evidence. Confidence >80% to act, <80% verify first. NEVER speculate without evidence. External Memory — For complex/lengthy work, write intermediate findings and final results toplans/reports/— prevents context loss and serves as deliverable.
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 · 420 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 177b0c2e6155
tester is an agent published in the GitHub repository duc01226/EasyPlatform (9 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 7,705 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
ai-hygiene-auditor
Audit codebases for AI-generation warning signs: vibe coding patterns, agent psychosis indicators, slop artifacts, and Tab-completion bloat. Specialized complement to bloat-auditor.
tester
테스트 작성 전담 에이전트. 단위/통합/E2E 테스트를 설계하고 구현하며, 커버리지 목표 달성을 책임진다.
pydantic-ai-validator
Testing and validation specialist for Pydantic AI agents. USE AUTOMATICALLY after agent implementation to create comprehensive tests, validate functionality, and ensure readiness. Uses TestModel and FunctionModel for thorough validation.
test-expert-csk
Test expert. Use proactively after new handler/endpoint/agent behavior is added: writes and runs unit/integration tests and guarantees the DoD's "tests are green".
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…
verify-app
Full verification - unit tests, migration check, lint, types.