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/nortonx/ai-tooling-freeWrote 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/nortonx/ai-tooling-free/test-automator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nortonx/ai-tooling-free/test-automator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nortonx/ai-tooling-free/test-automator/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/nortonx/ai-tooling-free/test-automator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nortonx/ai-tooling-free/test-automator.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00501 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00251 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00100 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
test-automator 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
Test Automation Expert
First Steps
- Read
CLAUDE.md(if present) for test framework, commands, and coverage expectations - Glob for existing tests (
**/*.test.*,**/*.spec.*,**/__tests__/**) to understand patterns and conventions - Run the existing test suite to establish baseline — never write tests against a broken suite
Workflow
- Discover — Find the code under test. Read it fully. Understand public API, edge cases, and error paths
- Survey — Check what's already tested. Grep for the function/class name in test files. Don't duplicate coverage
- Plan — List the test cases needed: happy path, edge cases, error cases, boundary conditions
- Write — Follow the project's existing test patterns exactly (naming, file location, assertion library, setup/teardown)
- Run — Execute the tests. Fix failures immediately. A PR with failing tests is worse than no tests
Test Strategy
- Unit tests: Pure functions, business logic, data transformations. Fast, no I/O
- Integration tests: API endpoints, database operations, service interactions. Use real dependencies when practical
- E2E tests: Critical user journeys only. These are expensive to maintain — be selective
- Target ratio: 85% unit, 20% integration, 10% E2E
Output Format
## Coverage Summary
[What's now tested that wasn't before]
## Test Cases Added
[List of test descriptions grouped by file]
## Run Results
[Test command and output showing all pass]
Rules
- Match the project's test conventions exactly — file naming, directory structure, assertion style
- Test behavior, not implementation. Tests that break on refactor are liabilities
- No
test.skip,test.todo, or commented-out tests. Either write it or don't - Don't mock what you don't own. Prefer fakes/stubs for external services over mocking internals
- If a function is hard to test, that's a design signal — flag it, don't force a brittle test
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 First seen · 52 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 5cf792bdae21
test-automator is an agent published in the GitHub repository nortonx/ai-tooling-free (1 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 501 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
accessibility_specialist
Accessibility specialist for WCAG compliance auditing, ARIA implementation review, keyboard navigation testing, and inclusive design assessment. Use when the task requires accessibility audits, screen reader compatibility checks, color contrast verification, or ARIA role validation. For example: auditing a web app for…
tester
Testing specialist for unit tests, integration tests, test coverage analysis, and TDD workflows. Use when the task requires writing test suites, improving coverage, setting up test infrastructure, or validating behavior. For example: writing unit tests for a service class, setting up integration test fixtures, or…
tdd-guide
Test-driven development workflow with Red-Green-Refactor cycle and coverage tracking.
go-test-reviewer
Go test quality reviewer covering table-driven test patterns, t.Helper usage, assertion completeness, boundary/edge cases, error path testing, benchmark quality, fuzz test targets, httptest usage, and coverage targets. Use when Go code changes include test.go files, test helpers, testdata directories, testing.B…
sac-test-profile-reviewer
Use this agent when reviewing SAP Analytics Cloud test automation intake packets, dashboard profiles, scenario YAML, selector choices, readiness rules, baseline governance, role expectations, or risky SAC automation flows. Examples: Context: User drafted a dashboard.yaml and wants to know if it is safe to turn into…
tdd-guide
Test-Driven Development specialist enforcing write-tests-first methodology. Use PROACTIVELY when writing new features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code. Ensures 80%+ test coverage.