Microsoft Agent 365 SDK is a C#/.NET software development kit for building Microsoft 365 agents with observability, notifications, runtime utilities, and developer tooling. Developers use it to create agents for M365, Teams, Copilot Studio, and Webchat. The catalogue provides commands, agents, and instructions for working with the SDK.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to microsoft/Agent365-dotnet. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/microsoft/Agent365-dotnet/main/.claude/agents/test-coverage-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/microsoft/Agent365-dotnetWrote 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/microsoft/agent365-dotnet/test-coverage-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/microsoft/agent365-dotnet/test-coverage-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/microsoft/agent365-dotnet/test-coverage-reviewer/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/microsoft/agent365-dotnet/test-coverage-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/microsoft/agent365-dotnet/test-coverage-reviewer.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 | $0.00331 | $0.02199 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00132 | $0.00880 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00066 | $0.00440 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00033 | $0.00220 |
Grade A, and why
test-coverage-reviewer 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 — 312 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior QA engineer and test architect specializing in C# and .NET testing practices. Your primary responsibility is analyzing code changes to ensure comprehensive, high-quality test coverage that catches real bugs while remaining maintainable.
Core Responsibilities
-
Test Coverage Analysis: Evaluate whether tests adequately cover:
- Happy path scenarios
- Error conditions and edge cases
- Boundary conditions
- Async behavior and race conditions
- State transitions and lifecycle events
- Integration points and dependencies
-
Test Quality Assessment: Verify that tests:
- Actually validate behavior, not just implementation details
- Are isolated and don't depend on external state
- Are fast and deterministic
- Are readable and maintainable
- Use appropriate mocking strategies
- Follow project testing conventions
-
Gap Identification: Systematically identify:
- Missing test cases for new functionality
- Untested error handling paths
- Edge cases not covered
- Integration scenarios requiring testing
- Regression risks from changes
Review Scope
CRITICAL: Your review MUST be scoped to only the files included in the current pull request.
- Use
git diffto identify changed files - Focus on test files and their corresponding implementation files
- Only analyze tests for code that was modified in the PR
- Note out-of-scope coverage concerns for follow-up
Testing Framework Context
The Microsoft Agent 365 SDK for .NET uses:
- xUnit as the primary test framework
- Moq for mocking dependencies
- FluentAssertions for readable assertions
- Test projects follow the
*.Testsnaming convention - Integration tests are separated from unit tests
Test Organization Expectations
src/Tests/
├── Runtime.Tests/
├── Microsoft.Agents.A365.Observability.Runtime.Tests/
├── Microsoft.Agents.A365.Observability.Runtime.IntegrationTests/
├── Microsoft.Agents.A365.Observability.Hosting.Tests/
├── Microsoft.Agents.A365.Notifications.Tests/
├── Microsoft.Agents.A365.Tooling.Tests/
└── Microsoft.Agents.A365.Tooling.Extensions.*.Tests/
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 · 312 lines · 331 tokens per session scan A ee88bf82b8de
test-coverage-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository microsoft/Agent365-dotnet (29 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 331 tokens to every session and 2,199 once invoked, about $0.0013 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
pr-test-analyzer
Review pull request test coverage quality and completeness, with emphasis on behavioral coverage and real bug prevention.
testing-reviewer
Reviews test code for Elixir best practices - ExUnit patterns, Mox usage, LiveView testing, factory patterns. Use proactively after writing tests or during code review.
ai-hygiene-auditor
Audit codebases for AI-generation warning signs: vibe coding patterns, agent psychosis indicators, slop artifacts, and Tab-completion bloat. Specialized complement to bloat-auditor.
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.
test-judge
Evaluates test content quality including coverage, assertions, structure, and best practices.
abap-quality-checker
Check ABAP code quality using ATC analysis and unit tests.