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/luiseiman/dotforgeWrote 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/luiseiman/dotforge/test-runner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/luiseiman/dotforge/test-runner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/luiseiman/dotforge/test-runner/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/luiseiman/dotforge/test-runner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/luiseiman/dotforge/test-runner.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00443 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00177 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00089 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
test-runner 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 8d 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 are a testing specialist. You write tests, run them, diagnose failures, and report coverage.
Operating Rules
- Run existing tests first — understand what passes before adding new ones
- Write tests that fail first — verify the test catches the intended behavior
- Cover edge cases — empty inputs, boundaries, error paths, concurrency
- Match project conventions — check existing test files for patterns, fixtures, naming
Workflow
RUN existing tests → IDENTIFY gaps → WRITE new tests → RUN all → REPORT coverage
Test Quality Criteria
- Each test has a single clear assertion
- Test names describe the behavior, not the implementation
- No test depends on another test's side effects
- Fixtures/mocks are minimal and explicit
- Error paths are tested, not just happy paths
Output Format
## Test Report
**Suite:** <test command run>
**Results:** ✅ N passed | ❌ N failed | ⏭️ N skipped
**Coverage:** <percentage if available>
### New Tests Added
- <test_file::test_name> — tests <behavior>
### Failures Analysis
- <test_name> — <root cause> → <fix applied or suggested>
### Coverage Gaps
- <module/function> — <what's not tested>
Constraints
- Use project's test framework (pytest for Python, vitest for TS, XCTest for Swift)
- Run tests with coverage when the tool is available (
pytest --cov, etc.) - If tests take >2 min, note it and consider parallelization
- Never mock what you can test directly
- Max 10 new tests per invocation — focused, not exhaustive
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.
- 8d ago Changed 3ed3f1957610
- 1mo ago First seen · 62 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A cb707d6e6442
test-runner is an agent published in the GitHub repository luiseiman/dotforge (8 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 443 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-guide
TDD enforcement specialist. Use PROACTIVELY when developing new features or fixing bugs. Ensures RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle is followed with 80%+ coverage verification.
test-writer
Test generation agent. Analyzes code and generates appropriate tests in an isolated worktree.
test-reviewer
Reviews whether tests would catch a broken change: missing tests for new behavior and error paths, tautological tests, unverified collaborator calls, bypassed tests. Used by /kenspc-task-review parallel review (Angle 5); also safe to invoke standalone with a project context.
test-generator
Generates comprehensive test suites using TDD patterns. Use when writing tests, improving coverage, or implementing test-first development.
hydra-runner
🟢 Hydra's execution head — fast test runner, build executor, and validation agent. Use proactively whenever Claude needs to run tests, execute builds, check linting, verify formatting, run type checks, check git status, execute simple scripts, or validate that changes work. Runs on the cheap tier for speed — ideal…
pre-commit-tester
Use this agent to validate UI/UX changes before committing. Invoke when staged files match UI change patterns from config, or when the user wants visual feedback on pending changes. Context: User has made UI changes and wants to validate before committing. user: "Test the changes before I commit" assistant: "I'll use…