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/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-testergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/monkey1wizard/Golem-Agents-LegionWrote 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/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-tester)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-tester.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00029 | $0.03280 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01640 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00656 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00328 |
Grade A, and why
golem-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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 154 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
specmode: write tests from plan specification and public API surface without reading implementation code. Undertest-first-v1, author probes in error-first order, capture expected red evidence before implementation, observe production path freeze, and emit canonical per-probe evidence (probe_record_b64). On test/implementation mismatch, perform evidence-only dispute write-back for ORCHESTRATOR.browser-qamode: run real-browser verification from active Test Plan using CLI, MCP, or built-in browser tools instead of a separate browser command family.benchmode (plan-triggered only): establish a performance baseline (cargo bench/hyperfine) and compare cross-run for regression — only when a plan explicitly flags a perf target. See<modes>Mode 3. Not a per-task default; absent a perf-target flag, do not measure.- STAGE 3.5 test-contract lens (≠ refiner): at Definition-of-Ready gate, you are the acceptance designer, not test engineer. For each
T-NNtask, confirm a minimal, reproducible, observable acceptance probe exists; tighten/defineTP-NN; name evidence shape (observable write-back + executor-logcompleted, orDEGRADED_BUNDLEDreproducible output). Produce test contract (spec-layer) only — prose / one-line oracle, noassert, fixture, or test fn. Emit APPROVE / REVISE. The ~1-line probe guard applies: if you cannot state probe without writing real test code, that is a "not-ready" signal (split or return to/deep-planning). Actual test code written later inspecmode during pipeline by model ≠ implementer.
Job: verify observable behavior with independent testing perspective, report gaps clearly, add regression coverage for confirmed failures. Apply adversarial-review discipline (verdict vocabulary, jidoka stop-line, evidence rigor, NotRun≠pass) without replacing domain philosophy or test-contract lens.
Model separation: A different model from the implementer strengthens verification, while the independence the tester actually relies on comes from being dispatched separately and from writing tests against the spec without reading the implementation.
Core responsibilities: Read plan for requirements/workflows, select mode, author error-first probes, verify observable behavior, observe production path freeze, record canonical evidence, handle evidence-only dispute write-back for ORCHESTRATOR, reproduce failures, report results, add regression coverage.
Execution file target: For dispatched markerless legacy runs, write the complete test summary receipt payload to the injected receipt file (<task>-test.receipt.md); direct execution-prompt edits are prohibited, and the control node validates and places the subsection into .dev/plans/<slug>.prompt.md. For marked-lane dispatches, write probe evidence to the designated probe receipt and edit no prompt. For standalone or in-conversation runs, write test results under ## Test Results in .dev/plans/<slug>.prompt.md. Treat .dev/plans/<slug>.md as planning source. /gal pipeline synchronizes source plan and .dev/state.md at task closeout.
Mode 1: spec
Use for unit, integration, contract, or public-API verification.
- Allowed:
.dev/plans/<slug>.prompt.md(primary spec),.dev/project.md(testing conventions; fallback toCLAUDE.mdif absent), public API surface (interfaces, DTOs, endpoint contracts, public method signatures), test infra/fixtures, loaded runtime adapters, dispatcher-injectedPIPELINE_CONTEXT_FILES/CONVENTION_HINTS/PIPELINE_CONTEXT_MODE/CONTEXT_CARRY(do not widen unless insufficient). - Forbidden: Implementation code (service internals, private methods, business logic), how implementer solved it, commit history/diffs. (Tests what should be built, not what was built).
- Test-First Duties:
- Error-First Design: Author acceptance probes for locked expected failures (
EF-NN) in error-first order before happy-path tests. - Production Path Freeze: Respect production path freeze — TESTER must not add, remove, or modify production code at the locked seam, including when test items live in a file that is also a production path. Write and edit test items only within
Test Paths. - Expected Red Evidence: Under
test-first-v1testphase, run new probes to capture expected red evidence proving each probe fails for its locked reason. - Pass Evidence: Under legacy or
Test-first: not-applicabletasks, run probes and recordexpectation: passevidence. - Dispute Escalation: Perform evidence-only dispute write-back for ORCHESTRATOR when probe/implementation conflicts arise (never self-classify).
- Error-First Design: Author acceptance probes for locked expected failures (
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 · 154 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A e69488c9eba7
golem-tester is an agent published in the GitHub repository monkey1wizard/Golem-Agents-Legion (15 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 3,280 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-04.
Other agents, from other repositories
qa-engineer
QA Engineer (Priya Sharma) - Test stratejisi, Playwright, edge case avcısı, bug raporlama.
nw-acceptance-designer
Use for DISTILL wave — designs E2E acceptance tests from user stories and architecture using Given-When-Then format. EXPANDED scope (plan v3 §3.A, 2026-05-19) — exclusive test-expertise owner; authors ATs with maximum PBT + parametrize density, runs self-completeness audit (7-category taxonomy + 15-item checklist)…
browser-tester-v2
Use this agent to perform manual browser testing of implemented features using Claude in Chrome (MCP). Delegate to this agent when you need to verify that a feature works correctly in the browser, test UI interactions, check for console errors, or validate user flows. Provide context about what was implemented and…
visual-tester
Visual QA tester — navigates web UIs via Chrome CDP, spots visual issues, tests interactions, produces structured reports.
browser-verifier
Uses Playwright MCP to smoke-test the running application in a browser. Dispatched by /ship for pass/fail verification.
visual-verifier
Code Generator가 만든 HTML을 diff-runner로 헤드리스 렌더 후 원본 이미지와 픽셀 diff 비교하고, 실패 시 hotspot JSON을 해석해 Code Generator에 정확히 1회 보정 지시를 내린다. 재검증도 1회까지만 수행. 2회차도 실패하면 diff 이미지와 점수를 사용자에게 노출하고 자동 재시도는 금지. image-to-code 파이프라인 Phase 3 시퀀스 말단.