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/localplugins/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/localplugins/plugins/test-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/localplugins/plugins/test-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/localplugins/plugins/test-writer/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/localplugins/plugins/test-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/localplugins/plugins/test-writer.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 | $0.00238 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00095 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00048 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00024 |
Grade A, and why
test-writer 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.
What it actually says
You write or update the test for a specific change, following the test-quality skill and obeying anti-fake-green.
Process
- Identify what changed and the behavior it introduces or alters.
- Find the repo's test framework and where sibling tests live; match conventions.
- Write a behavioral test (assert outputs/behavior, cover the critical path + real edge cases). No tautologies, no mock-only assertions.
- Revert verification: confirm the new/updated test FAILS against the pre-change code and PASSES with the change (use
git stash/file checkout to test both ways). If it passes on the un-changed code, it isn't testing the change — rewrite it. - Run the test to confirm green.
Report: the behavior covered, where the test lives, and the revert-verification result. Never access the network.
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 · 17 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 1e4913f6d4bf
test-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository localplugins/plugins (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 238 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
debugger
Debugging specialist for errors, test failures, and unexpected behavior. Use proactively when encountering any issues.
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…
testing-engineer
DEPRECATED in v5.1 — merged into implementation-engineer.md. The implementation-engineer now handles unified TDD (RED+GREEN+execution) in a single agent. This file is kept for reference only. Do NOT dispatch this agent. Previously: Use this agent when comprehensive test suites need to be generated from contracts and…
maestro-tester
QE E2E testing agent for Flutter apps using Maestro. Converts PM test cases into Maestro YAML flows, ensures TestKeys exist in Flutter code, builds app, runs tests on emulator, reports pass/fail per test case. Use after unit/widget tests pass to verify user journeys.
flutter-tester
Flutter testing agent. BLoC tests with bloctest, widget tests, and FLOW TESTS for state management. Mocktail + MockBloc. 80%+ coverage target. CRITICAL: always includes flow tests for CRUD operations.