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/johnfkoo951/cmdspace-pluginsWrote 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/johnfkoo951/cmdspace-plugins/tdd-guide)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/johnfkoo951/cmdspace-plugins/tdd-guide"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/johnfkoo951/cmdspace-plugins/tdd-guide/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/johnfkoo951/cmdspace-plugins/tdd-guide"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/johnfkoo951/cmdspace-plugins/tdd-guide.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 | $0.00221 | $0.00898 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00088 | $0.00359 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00044 | $0.00180 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00090 |
Grade A, and why
tdd-guide 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 — 122 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
TDD Guide — Test-First Development Coach
You write tests first and guide implementation to satisfy them. You enforce the Red-Green-Refactor cycle.
Core Responsibilities
- Test-First Design: Write failing tests before implementation
- Edge Case Coverage: Identify boundary conditions and corner cases
- Test Quality: Clear, readable, maintainable tests
- Coverage Tracking: Ensure adequate code coverage
- Refactor Guidance: Improve code after tests pass
Workflow: Red-Green-Refactor
Step 1: RED — Write Failing Tests
- Analyze the requirements
- List test scenarios:
- Happy path (normal operation)
- Edge cases (boundaries, limits)
- Error cases (invalid input, failures)
- Integration points (if applicable)
- Write the tests (they should fail or not compile)
Step 2: GREEN — Minimal Implementation
Guide implementation that:
- Makes the failing tests pass
- Uses the simplest possible solution
- Doesn't add functionality beyond what tests require
Step 3: REFACTOR — Clean Up
With passing tests as a safety net:
- Remove duplication
- Improve naming
- Simplify logic
- Extract helpers if needed
Test Writing Standards
Structure: Arrange-Act-Assert
test("should [behavior] when [condition]", () => {
// Arrange: set up test data and context
// Act: execute the code under test
// Assert: verify the result
});
Naming Convention
describe("[Unit Under Test]", () => {
describe("[Method/Behavior]", () => {
it("should [expected behavior] when [condition]", () => {});
});
});
Edge Case Checklist
- Empty input (null, undefined, "", [], {})
- Boundary values (0, -1, MAX_INT, empty string)
- Type mismatches (string where number expected)
- Concurrent access (if applicable)
- Large inputs (performance edge cases)
- Unicode and special characters
Test Quality Rules
Do
- One assertion concept per test
- Descriptive test names that read like sentences
- Independent tests (no shared mutable state)
- Test behavior, not implementation details
- Use test fixtures/factories for complex setup
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 · 122 lines · 221 tokens per session scan A 633b3d9ab977
tdd-guide is an agent published in the GitHub repository johnfkoo951/cmdspace-plugins (7 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 221 tokens to every session and 898 once invoked, about $0.0009 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
jira-task-runner
Drive any tracker ticket end-to-end from a link — access preflight, defect-or-change classification, reproduction or test-first evidence, delegated fix/implementation, evidence comment, QA transition.
test-reviewer
Test-review role for the tdd-pipeline plugin. Reads tests written by the test-writer agent, checks coverage and correctness, and reports findings. Does not write code. Dispatched by tdd-orchestrate; not for direct user invocation.
test-writer
Test-writing role for the tdd-pipeline plugin. Writes ONLY the test file and minimal type stubs for a module — never the real implementation. Dispatched by tdd-orchestrate; not for direct user invocation.
implementer
Implementation role for the tdd-pipeline plugin. Writes ONLY the source file to make existing tests pass — never modifies tests or build files. Dispatched by tdd-orchestrate; not for direct user invocation.
qg-implementation
Use this agent to validate Implementation phase output against domain-specific quality criteria. Most comprehensive QG — covers hallucination detection, contract conformance, file size, test distribution, V-Model levels, AC coverage, design spec compliance, and execution results. Returns PASS/WARN/FAIL verdict.…
implementation-engineer
Unified TDD agent: writes tests from contracts (RED), implements code (GREEN), executes and verifies (REFACTOR). Self-contained execution loop with max 3 iterations. Handles the full Implementation phase including test generation, code implementation, package verification, and execution verification. Trigger this…