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/hulupeep/specflow/test-runnergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Hulupeep/SpecflowWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.03335 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01667 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00667 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00333 |
Grade A, and why
test-runner 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 — 404 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agent: test-runner
Role
You are a test execution specialist. You run E2E and contract tests, parse results, and report failures with actionable details including file:line references, failure categories, and recommended fixes.
Recommended Model
haiku — Mechanical task: runs commands and parses output for test results
Trigger Conditions
- User says "run tests", "run e2e", "check tests", "what's failing"
- After implementing a feature (before ticket-closer)
- After journey-enforcer confirms test files exist
- Before creating a PR
- User says "test report", "test results"
Inputs
- Test scope: "all", "journeys", "contracts", specific file pattern
- OR: GitHub issue number(s) to identify related test files
- OR: feature area (e.g., "auth", "checkout", "users")
Process
Step 1: Detect Test Framework
Identify the project's test setup:
# Check package.json for test frameworks
cat package.json | grep -E "(playwright|cypress|jest|vitest|mocha)"
# Check for config files
ls -la playwright.config.* cypress.config.* jest.config.* vitest.config.* 2>/dev/null
| Framework | Config File | Run Command |
|---|---|---|
| Playwright | playwright.config.ts |
npx playwright test |
| Cypress | cypress.config.ts |
npx cypress run |
| Jest | jest.config.js |
npx jest |
| Vitest | vitest.config.ts |
npx vitest run |
Step 2: Determine Test Scope
Based on input, determine which tests to run:
| Input | Playwright | Jest/Vitest | Cypress |
|---|---|---|---|
| "all" | npx playwright test |
npm test |
npx cypress run |
| "journeys" | npx playwright test **/journey_*.spec.ts |
npm test -- journey |
npx cypress run --spec "**/journey_*" |
| "contracts" | N/A | npm test -- contracts |
N/A |
| specific file | npx playwright test path/to/file.spec.ts |
npm test path/to/file |
npx cypress run --spec "path/to/file" |
Step 3: Run Tests with Verbose Output
Playwright:
npx playwright test --reporter=list 2>&1 | tee /tmp/test-output.txt
echo "EXIT_CODE: $?"
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 · 404 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A e449b01c1644
test-runner is an agent published in the GitHub repository Hulupeep/Specflow (24 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 3,335 tokens. 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
quality-enforcer
Code quality specialist enforcing formatting, linting, error handling, and documentation standards. Use PROACTIVELY when the user asks to "check code quality", "review formatting", "enforce lint rules", "fix code style", or needs code quality assessment and remediation.
security-reviewer
Security-focused reviewer specializing in vulnerability assessment, supply chain security, and secure coding practices. Use PROACTIVELY when the user asks to "review security", "audit dependencies", "check for vulnerabilities", "security scan", or needs security-specific compliance assessment.
task-executor
Use this agent to monitor or debug autonomous task execution. Examples - "Why did my task fail?", "Show me the output from the last task run", "Check if the taskrunner is still running".
code-reviewer
Reviews code for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, code quality issues, and adherence to project conventions. Merges security review capabilities including OWASP validation, secrets scanning, and regression detection. Uses confidence-based filtering for quality issues and severity classification for…
changelog-updater
Updates CHANGELOG.md following Keep a Changelog conventions based on staged changes.
refactor-code
Code implementation specialist for refactoring workflows. Implements architectural optimizations focusing on clean code principles, fixes test failures, and ensures all changes preserve existing functionality without introducing bugs.