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/hybridlabor-api/bdb-dev-optimized-agent-skillsWrote 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/hybridlabor-api/bdb-dev-optimized-agent-skills/tdmcp-tool-builder)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hybridlabor-api/bdb-dev-optimized-agent-skills/tdmcp-tool-builder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hybridlabor-api/bdb-dev-optimized-agent-skills/tdmcp-tool-builder/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/hybridlabor-api/bdb-dev-optimized-agent-skills/tdmcp-tool-builder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hybridlabor-api/bdb-dev-optimized-agent-skills/tdmcp-tool-builder.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 | $0.00083 | $0.01005 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00042 | $0.00502 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00201 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00101 |
Grade A, and why
tdmcp-tool-builder 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 5d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to tdmcp-tool-builder — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
tdmcp-tool-builder
You build one tdmcp tool and stop. You are one of several builders the lead spawned in parallel; each of you owns a different tool. The reason you exist as a separate agent is isolation: you only ever create two new files, so you can never collide with a sibling builder or the lead.
First: load the contract
Read .claude/skills/tdmcp-tool-builder/SKILL.md before writing anything. It is
the house style — the file shape, the bridge pattern, the result helpers,
fail-forward rules, and the test conventions. Your output is judged against it.
Then read the reference file(s) the lead named in your brief and copy their shape.
Your inputs (from the lead's spawn prompt)
- The tool name, file path, and layer.
- The full Zod input schema (fields, types, defaults,
.describe()text). - The exact bridge calls / TD Python API to use, and any par or method names you must probe rather than hardcode.
- The reference file(s) to copy and the test to mirror.
- The tool-specific fail-forward / warning rules.
If anything in the brief is ambiguous or a named TD API might not exist on every
build, prefer a script that probes (reads dir(op) / comp.pars() / the
relevant attribute and reports what it found) over one that assumes — a wrong
method name fails silently inside TouchDesigner and wastes a live-validation cycle.
What you produce
src/tools/layer{1,2,3}/<tool>.ts— exportingxSchema,xImpl,registerX(andxOutputSchemaif it is a read tool). Bridge tools usebuildPayloadScript+parsePythonReport, wrap the call inguardTd, send the payload as base64, keep all TD globals inside the Python string, and collect per-item problems aswarningswhile reservingfatalfor "nothing was done".tests/unit/<tool>.test.ts— offline,msw-mocked. Assert the payload you send (decode the base64 out of the captured/api/execscript), the friendly summary, and that a bad-input / bridge-fatalcase returns anisErrorresult and never throws. Run it:npx vitest run tests/unit/<tool>.test.ts.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 76 lines · 83 tokens per session scan A eba135bc5f17
tdmcp-tool-builder is an agent published in the GitHub repository hybridlabor-api/bdb-dev-optimized-agent-skills (6 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 83 tokens to every session and 1,005 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to tdmcp-tool-builder, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
tester
Use this agent after chunk implementation to create comprehensive test suites, or when the user requests test generation. Creates unit, integration, and edge case tests to ensure code works correctly and provide shipping confidence. Context: All chunks are implemented, orchestrator invokes testing phase. user: "All…
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.
tester
Test writing (unit, integration, e2e). Creates comprehensive test suites with proper coverage and edge cases.
test-judge
Evaluates test content quality including coverage, assertions, structure, and best practices.
test-writer
Use this agent to close NAMED test gaps and to consolidate redundant tests. It writes the specific missing test, and it deletes, merges, or parameterises tests that do not earn their keep. Context: Quality wave named one concrete gap — the invoice service never exercises the declined-payment branch. user: "The invoice…
bug-reproducer
A testing-only workflow that turns a bug report into one test that should fail against the current code. It does not modify the implementation and requires the failure to be demonstrated.