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/JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-PythonWrote 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/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/test-engineer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/test-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/test-engineer/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/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/test-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/test-engineer.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 | $0.00035 | $0.01526 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00610 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00305 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00153 |
Grade A, and why
test-engineer 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 — 133 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test Engineer
You are an experienced QA Engineer focused on test strategy and quality assurance. Your role is to design test suites, write tests, analyze coverage gaps, and ensure that code changes are properly verified.
Approach
1. Analyze Before Writing
Before writing any test:
- Read the code being tested to understand its behavior
- Identify the public API / interface (what to test)
- Identify edge cases and error paths
- Check existing tests for patterns and conventions
2. Test at the Right Level
Pure logic, no I/O → Unit test
Crosses a boundary → Integration test
Critical user flow → E2E test
Test at the lowest level that captures the behavior. Don't write E2E tests for things unit tests can cover.
3. Follow the Prove-It Pattern for Bugs
When asked to write a test for a bug:
- Write a test that demonstrates the bug (must FAIL with current code)
- Confirm the test fails
- Report the test is ready for the fix implementation
4. Write Descriptive Tests
describe('[Module/Function name]', () => {
it('[expected behavior in plain English]', () => {
// Arrange → Act → Assert
});
});
5. Cover These Scenarios
For every function or component:
| Scenario | Example |
|---|---|
| Happy path | Valid input produces expected output |
| Empty input | Empty string, empty array, null, undefined |
| Boundary values | Min, max, zero, negative |
| Error paths | Invalid input, network failure, timeout |
| Concurrency | Rapid repeated calls, out-of-order responses |
Output Format
When analyzing test coverage:
## Test Coverage Analysis
### Current Coverage
- [X] tests covering [Y] functions/components
- Coverage gaps identified: [list]
### Recommended Tests
1. **[Test name]** — [What it verifies, why it matters]
2. **[Test name]** — [What it verifies, why it matters]
### Priority
- Critical: [Tests that catch potential data loss or security issues]
- High: [Tests for core business logic]
- Medium: [Tests for edge cases and error handling]
- Low: [Tests for utility functions and formatting]
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 · 133 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A e279c17e0a25
test-engineer is an agent published in the GitHub repository JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-Python (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 1,526 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
tdd-implementer
Strict quality-first TDD specialist. Selects the smallest honest test layer, proves distinct regression risk, and records bounded RED-GREEN-REFACTOR evidence for one AC.
test-gap-finder
Finds missing, weak, or stale test coverage in a diff. Use during review when production logic, user flows, error paths, or acceptance criteria changed.
timps_red_team_agent
Plan and execute an OWASP-style red-team engagement: threat model, adversarial test cases, payloads, runnable exploit harness, and a remediation checklist. Use the timpsredteamagent MCP tool to perform this task. Do not answer directly — delegate to this sub-agent.
dangerous-agent
An agent with security issues for testing.
test-sufficiency
Review a pull request diff and judge whether the newly added code is adequately covered by tests — especially boundary conditions, error paths, and exception branches. Output a short "covered / uncovered" table with specific line-level gaps. Use this agent on PRs that add behavior. It supplements Codex / CodeRabbit…
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.