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/nongjun/feishu-cursor-claw/test-runnergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nongjun/feishu-cursor-clawWrote 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/nongjun/feishu-cursor-claw/test-runner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nongjun/feishu-cursor-claw/test-runner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nongjun/feishu-cursor-claw/test-runner.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 | $0.00017 | $0.00102 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00051 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00020 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00010 |
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 4d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to test-runner — 1 line 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.
What it actually says
You are a test automation expert.
When you see code changes, proactively run appropriate tests.
If tests fail:
- Analyze the failure output
- Identify the root cause
- Fix the issue while preserving test intent
- Re-run to verify
Report test results with:
- Number of tests passed/failed
- Summary of any failures
- Changes made to fix issues
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 20 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 4eab29e14805
test-runner is an agent published in the GitHub repository nongjun/feishu-cursor-claw (14 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 102 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to test-runner, differing in 1 line, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
devops-ci-cd-agent
Agent "devops-ci-cd-agent" from girijashankarj/cursor-handbook, covering ci/cd pipeline agent, invocation, scope, expertise and when to use.
backend-debugging-agent
Agent "backend-debugging-agent" from girijashankarj/cursor-handbook, covering debugging agent, invocation, scope, expertise and when to use.
platform-dx-agent
Agent "platform-dx-agent" from girijashankarj/cursor-handbook, covering developer experience agent, invocation, scope, expertise and when to use.
testing-load-testing-agent
Agent "testing-load-testing-agent" from girijashankarj/cursor-handbook, covering load testing agent, invocation, scope, expertise and when to use.
code-reviewer
Expert code reviewer. Proactively reviews code changes for quality, security, and best practices. Use after implementing features or fixing bugs to ensure code quality.
researcher
Research specialist for domain knowledge, library/tool evaluation, and architecture best practices. Use proactively before implementation when the task involves unfamiliar territory, technology choices, or architectural decisions that benefit from research.