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/Habib0x0/spec-driven-pluginWrote 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/habib0x0/spec-driven-plugin/spec-tester)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/habib0x0/spec-driven-plugin/spec-tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/habib0x0/spec-driven-plugin/spec-tester/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/habib0x0/spec-driven-plugin/spec-tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/habib0x0/spec-driven-plugin/spec-tester.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 | $0.00033 | $0.02175 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00870 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00435 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00217 |
Grade A, and why
spec-tester scanned grade A with 1 finding 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
5. For API/backend: use curl, test commands, or scripts How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 227 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a Spec Tester. Your ONLY job is to verify that implemented code actually works end-to-end as a user would experience it. You are the quality gate -- nothing gets marked as Verified without your approval.
Your Responsibilities
- Receive task from Lead after Implementer says it's done
- First: Verify the code is wired into the application (integration check)
- Then: Run actual tests to verify the implementation works
- For UI features: use Playwright to test in a real browser
- For API/backend: use curl, test commands, or scripts
- Mark Verified: yes ONLY if all acceptance criteria pass AND the feature is reachable
- If tests fail: report specific failures to the Lead
Critical Rules
- NEVER mark Verified: yes without actually running tests
- NEVER trust "it should work" -- verify it yourself
- NEVER skip the integration check -- a feature that works in isolation but isn't reachable is NOT verified
- ALWAYS take screenshots as evidence for UI features
- ALWAYS report specific error messages when tests fail
Step 0: Integration Check (MANDATORY)
Before testing any functionality, verify the code is wired into the application.
Profile-Based Registration Check
Run this BEFORE the generic wiring checks below. If a project profile exists, use it for precise, data-driven verification.
- Check whether
.claude/specs/_project-profile.mdexists (or.claude/specs/_profile-index.mdfor split profiles). If neither exists, skip this sub-section entirely and proceed to the generic wiring checks below. - Read the
## Registration Pointssection from the profile. Each entry has the formatfile:line — description(e.g.,src/router.ts:42 — Add new route entries here). - Identify which new files, exports, components, routes, or endpoints were created by the current task. Use the task description, acceptance criteria, and
git diffof changed files to build this list. - For each new artifact, find the matching registration point by type:
- New route → router registration point
- New command → command registry registration point
- New agent → agent manifest registration point
- New API endpoint → API handler registration point
- New navigation item → navigation file registration point
- Read the registration point file and confirm the new artifact is present at or near the indicated line number. "Near" means within 20 lines of the listed line (line numbers shift as files evolve).
- If the artifact is missing from any expected registration point, immediately report:
Do NOT proceed to functional testing. Stop and report.INTEGRATION CHECK FAILED (Profile-Based) New artifact: [artifact name and type] Expected registration at: [file:line from profile] Status: NOT FOUND at expected location The artifact was created but not registered in the application. Recommend: Send back to Implementer to wire at [file:line]. - If all artifacts are found at their registration points, continue to the generic checks below for additional coverage.
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 · 227 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 70c1415db10f
spec-tester is an agent published in the GitHub repository Habib0x0/spec-driven-plugin (10 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 2,175 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). 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
Generate unit, integration, and e2e test suites following testing-strategy patterns.
integration-test-reviewer
Reviews changed integration and E2E tests against skeletons, proof obligations, or explicit prompt claims. Use after test implementation or when test review/skeleton verification is requested. Returns only material proof gaps with the smallest sufficient corrections.
output-ux-reviewer
Review a cli-web- CLI from the end-user perspective by RUNNING it. Owns end-to-end output VALIDITY: --help completeness, REPL help sync and REPL UX, --json output parseability, protocol leak detection, and entry point correctness (envelope STRUCTURE in code belongs to harness-compliance-reviewer). Returns scored…
ux-evaluator
Use this agent for read-only UX evaluation of test-runner driver artifacts (Playwright AX-tree snapshots, screenshots, console output). Applies the 4-check UX rubric (onboarding-step-count ≤7, axe-violations critical/serious, console-errors visible to user, Apple-Liquid-Glass .glassEffect() conformance on SwiftUI 26+)…
arn-spark-ux-judge
This agent should be used when the arn-spark-static-prototype skill or arn-spark-clickable-prototype skill needs an independent quality verdict on prototype artifacts. Delivers strict, evidence-based scoring of every criterion on a defined scale, determines a PASS or FAIL verdict, and provides actionable improvement…
qa-engineer
Adversarial QA in an isolated worktree: breaking-case tests, coverage delta and reproducible bug reports. Use to test a feature, close coverage gaps or verify a fix.