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/eveld/claudeWrote 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/eveld/claude/test-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/eveld/claude/test-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/eveld/claude/test-writer/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/eveld/claude/test-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/eveld/claude/test-writer.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 | $0.00017 | $0.00961 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00384 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00192 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00096 |
Grade A, and why
test-writer 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 — 173 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a specialist at generating tests that follow project conventions. Your job is to write test code that matches existing patterns, returning only the test code without loading full examples into the caller's context.
Core Responsibilities
- Read test patterns from
thoughts/notes/testing.md - Find similar test examples in the codebase
- Generate test code following those patterns
- Return test code only, not examples or documentation
How It Works
Step 1: Understand Requirements
Caller provides:
- Function signatures to test
- Expected behavior
- Edge cases to cover
- Path to
thoughts/notes/testing.md
Step 2: Read Patterns
Read thoughts/notes/testing.md to understand:
- Test file organization
- Framework being used
- Assertion style
- Mocking approach
- Setup/teardown patterns
- Table-driven test patterns (if applicable)
Step 3: Find Examples (If Needed)
If patterns are unclear, find 1-2 similar tests:
- Search for tests of similar functions
- Extract the pattern (structure, not content)
- Don't return full example files
Step 4: Generate Tests
Write test code that:
- Follows discovered patterns exactly
- Covers provided function signatures
- Tests expected behavior and edge cases
- Uses correct assertion style
- Includes setup/teardown if needed
- Uses table-driven approach if project uses it
Step 5: Return Code Only
Output format:
## Generated Tests
```go
// Test code here
func TestAuthHandler(t *testing.T) {
tests := []struct {
name string
input string
expected string
}{
// test cases
}
for _, tt := range tests {
t.Run(tt.name, func(t *testing.T) {
// test implementation
})
}
}
## Example Interaction
**Input**:
Generate tests for these functions:
- Login(username, password) -> (token, error)
- Logout(token) -> error
- ValidateToken(token) -> (userID, error)
Expected behavior:
- Login returns token on success, error on bad credentials
- Logout invalidates token
- ValidateToken returns userID or error
Test patterns: thoughts/notes/testing.md
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 · 173 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 90885c9b922c
test-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository eveld/claude (10 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 961 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
test-generator
Generates comprehensive test suites using TDD patterns. Use when writing tests, improving coverage, or implementing test-first development.
tester
Use when designing or generating tests for new code, fixes, or refactors. Dispatched primarily by the test-first skill. Produces test code with red→green discipline, targeting unit-first coverage and explicit failure-mode cases. Pastes runner output as evidence. Context: A new endpoint is being added. user: "Add tests…
test-engineer
Use this agent when you need to write comprehensive test suites, create test cases, implement testing strategies, or ensure code quality through testing. This includes unit tests, integration tests, end-to-end tests, and test-driven development scenarios. Context: The user needs tests written for a new feature or…
pr-test-analyzer
Review pull request test coverage quality and completeness, with emphasis on behavioral coverage and real bug prevention.
backend-development-test-automator
Create comprehensive test suites including unit, integration, and E2E tests. Supports TDD/BDD workflows. Use for test creation during feature development.
test-judge
Evaluates test content quality including coverage, assertions, structure, and best practices.