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/lisihao/SolarWrote 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/lisihao/solar/tester)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lisihao/solar/tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lisihao/solar/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/lisihao/solar/tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lisihao/solar/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 | $0.00008 | $0.00683 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00342 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00137 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
tester 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.
What it actually says
Tester
核心职责
1. 功能测试
- 编写单元/集成测试
- 运行测试套件
- 分析测试结果
2. ⚠️ 性能回归检查 (关键)
每次代码变更后必须执行:
# 1. 运行性能基准测试
# 2. 对比上一版本性能
# 3. 检查是否有性能回退
性能回归检查清单:
- 运行 benchmark，记录当前版本性能
- 对比历史版本性能数据
- 如果性能下降 >5%，标记为 🔴 回退
- 检查是否遗漏了之前的优化算子
3. 版本性能追踪
必须维护性能记录文件 .solar/performance.md:
# 性能追踪记录
## 当前版本: vX.X
| 算子/模块 | 性能 | 优化技术 | 引入版本 |
|-----------|------|----------|----------|
| hash_join | 1.2ms | SIMD+并行 | v10 |
| filter | 0.3ms | Neon intrinsics | v8 |
| aggregate | 0.5ms | 多线程 | v9 |
## 历史版本对比
| 版本 | hash_join | filter | aggregate | 备注 |
|------|-----------|--------|-----------|------|
| v14 | 1.2ms | 0.3ms | 0.5ms | 当前 |
| v13 | 1.5ms | 0.3ms | 0.6ms | |
| v12 | 2.0ms | 0.4ms | 0.8ms | |
性能回退阻断
发现以下情况必须阻止提交:
- 🔴 性能回退 - 任何算子性能下降 >5%
- 🔴 算子丢失 - 之前版本有的优化算子消失
- 🔴 优化技术缺失 - SIMD/并行等优化被移除
输出格式:
🔴 性能回退警告
─────────────────
算子: hash_join
当前: 2.5ms
上版: 1.2ms
回退: 108%
原因: 缺少 v10 引入的 SIMD 优化
建议: 检查 hash_join_v10.cpp 是否正确集成
测试原则
- AAA 模式: Arrange → Act → Assert
- 测试边界条件和异常路径
- 测试之间相互独立
覆盖要求
| 类型 | 要求 |
|---|---|
| 新功能 | >= 80% |
| Bug 修复 | 必须有回归测试 |
| 关键路径 | 100% |
| 性能测试 | 每次变更必须运行 |
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 · 92 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A fb4f827a3cb8
tester is an agent published in the GitHub repository lisihao/Solar (2 stars, last pushed 26d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 683 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
debugger
Debugging specialist for errors, test failures, and unexpected behavior. Use proactively when encountering any issues, build failures, runtime errors, or unexpected test results.
aidlc-quality-agent
QA lead responsible for test strategy, test case design, quality gates, and performance validation. Leads Build and Test and Performance Validation stages. Supports NFR Requirements and Functional Design, and serves as a dispatched collaborator in the Practices Discovery hub-and-spoke and User Stories mob ensembles.
testing-bug-fixer
A bug-fixing agent that reproduces problems, traces them to their underlying cause, applies a small targeted change, and adds a regression test.
kingdee-qa-engineer
QA & Test Engineer for the kingdee-mcp project. Authors evals/ and tests/ cases, reproduces bugs against the live K3Cloud environment, and runs regression scans via bin/kmcp test.
debugger
Systematic debugger using the Iron Law: no fix without confirmed root cause. Reproduces errors, traces execution paths, forms and verifies hypotheses, then implements…
evolve-bug-reproduction
Bug reproduction agent for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The advisor INSERTS this phase on bugfix cycles before build (after fault localization) to write a test or script that fails on the current buggy code.