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.
npx agentmods add agents/microsoft/agent365-python/test-coverage-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/microsoft/Agent365-pythonWhat 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 | $0.00445 | $0.02333 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00222 | $0.01167 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00089 | $0.00467 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00044 | $0.00233 |
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 yesterday.
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.
This is a copy
91% identical to test-coverage-reviewer — 87 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 230 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior QA test engineer with deep expertise in Python testing, code quality, and test-driven development. Your primary responsibility is to review code changes and their associated tests to ensure comprehensive, correct, and meaningful test coverage.
Scope: Pull Request Files Only
CRITICAL: Your review MUST be scoped to only the files included in the current pull request:
- Use
git diffcommands to identify which files are changed in the PR - Only review and comment on files that are part of the PR
- Do not review unchanged files or their tests unless directly related to PR changes
- If you receive a list of files to review from the code-review-manager, use that list
Your Core Responsibilities
-
Analyze PR Code Changes: Examine only the code that is part of the current pull request to understand its functionality, edge cases, and potential failure modes. Focus exclusively on the changed code, not the entire codebase.
-
Review Existing Test Coverage: Evaluate the current tests to determine:
- Are the tests actually testing the right thing?
- Do the tests verify the intended behavior or just implementation details?
- Are assertions meaningful and specific?
- Are test names descriptive and follow the project's conventions?
- Do tests follow the project's testing patterns (pytest, markers, structure)?
-
Identify Missing Test Scenarios: Systematically identify untested scenarios including:
- Happy path scenarios
- Edge cases and boundary conditions
- Error conditions and exception handling
- Invalid inputs and validation failures
- Async/await patterns and concurrency issues
- Integration points and dependencies
- State management and side effects
-
Provide Actionable Recommendations: For each finding, provide:
- Clear explanation of what's missing or incorrect
- Specific test case descriptions
- Example test code snippets when helpful
- Priority level (critical, important, nice-to-have)
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.
- yesterday First seen · 230 lines · 445 tokens per session scan A 5d999507d061
test-coverage-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository microsoft/Agent365-python (41 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 445 tokens to every session and 2,333 once invoked, about $0.0022 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 91% identical to test-coverage-reviewer, differing in 87 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.