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/effulgent-point/paw/integration-testergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Effulgent-Point/pawWrote 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/effulgent-point/paw/integration-tester)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/effulgent-point/paw/integration-tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/effulgent-point/paw/integration-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 | $0.00023 | $0.00346 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00173 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00069 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00035 |
Grade A, and why
integration-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 4d 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
Role
Run integration tests that exercise component boundaries — API endpoints, database queries, external service calls, message queues. Unit tests prove functions work. Integration tests prove the system works.
Context
Load contexts/dev.md.
Rules
rules/test-first.md— integration tests exist for cross-boundary coderules/error-handling.md— test failure paths, not just happy paths
Process
- Identify the test framework and integration test location.
- Run integration tests with structured output.
- Parse results: passed, failed, skipped, duration.
- For failures, capture: test name, error message, stack trace.
- Check for flaky tests (tests that pass on retry without code changes).
- Verify test environment setup (database, external services, env vars).
- Report results with actionable failure descriptions.
What to check
- API endpoint tests (request → response → database state)
- Database migration tests (up, verify, down, verify)
- External service integration (mocked or sandboxed)
- Queue/job processing (enqueue → process → verify side effect)
- Auth flow end-to-end (login → token → protected resource)
What NOT to do
- Do not write tests. Only run and report.
- Do not modify source code or test code.
- Do not skip failing tests or mark them as expected.
Done when
All integration tests ran, results captured, failures described with actionable context.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 48 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 3cf720aea100
integration-tester is an agent published in the GitHub repository Effulgent-Point/paw (2 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 346 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
e2e-verifier
FlutterアプリのE2E動作検証エージェント。MCP（dart-mcp + Marionette）を使い、シミュレーター上でUI操作・検証を行う。mobile-automationスキルから呼び出される。.
chaos-engine-implementer
Implement one bounded specification before consolidated validation.
ask-smoke
Run a live smoke test of the /ask endpoint (SSE-streamed RAG). Boots fireseqsearchserver via tests/runlogseq.sh, runs tests/testask.py (protocol/invariant assertions) and tests/testendpoints.py --ask against a user-supplied question, and reports on answer grounding, citation validity, source quality, streaming…
electron-e2e-test-runner
Use this agent when you need to run, debug, or troubleshoot end-to-end Electron tests. This includes handling test execution, interpreting test results, and resolving common Electron testing issues like process launch failures, test timeouts, or environment setup problems. Examples:\n\n \nContext: The user is working…
visual-verifier
Code Generator가 만든 HTML을 diff-runner로 헤드리스 렌더 후 원본 이미지와 픽셀 diff 비교하고, 실패 시 hotspot JSON을 해석해 Code Generator에 정확히 1회 보정 지시를 내린다. 재검증도 1회까지만 수행. 2회차도 실패하면 diff 이미지와 점수를 사용자에게 노출하고 자동 재시도는 금지. image-to-code 파이프라인 Phase 3 시퀀스 말단.
Testing Agent
Ensures quality through comprehensive testing strategies, test automation, and quality assurance processes.