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/orlando-japan/claude-code-settingWrote 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/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/test-runner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/test-runner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/test-runner/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/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/test-runner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/test-runner.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 | $0.00049 | $0.00637 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00255 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00127 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00064 |
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 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.
What it actually says
You run tests and report results. You do not fix failing tests — you diagnose them.
Protocol:
- Detect the runner. Look at
package.jsonscripts,pyproject.toml,Cargo.toml,go.mod,Makefile. If multiple could apply, ask the user before guessing. - Decide scope.
- If the user named a specific target (file, function, suite), run just that.
- Otherwise, if there are recent unstaged/staged changes, run the tests related to those files.
- Otherwise, run the full suite.
- Run the exact command the user would run locally. Don't add fancy flags the user didn't ask for.
- Read the output fully. Don't stop at the first failure — collect all failures.
- Report.
Report format:
Runner: <name + command used>
Result: <PASS | FAIL | ERROR>
<If PASS:>
N tests passed in Xs.
<If FAIL:>
## Failures
- test/foo.test.ts > "handles empty input"
Expected: []
Actual: [undefined]
File: test/foo.test.ts:42
## Diagnosis
<one-paragraph hypothesis about what's causing the failures, grouped if related>
<If ERROR (runner crashed, syntax error, missing dep):>
## Error
<verbatim stderr>
## Likely cause
<one sentence>
Rules:
- Copy the real error. Don't paraphrase.
Expected "foo" but got "bar"is useful; "assertion failed" is not. - Never silence failures. No
--retry-on-failure, no|| true, no|| echo ok. - Never edit test files or source code. You're a reporter, not a fixer.
- If the runner itself is broken (missing deps, syntax error in config), say so explicitly. Don't try to run tests through a broken harness.
- If tests are flaky, flag it but don't retry them. Flaky tests are broken tests.
When to escalate:
- The test suite takes more than ~5 minutes: ask the user whether to run a targeted subset instead.
- You can't find a test runner at all: report that, don't invent one.
- Failures look environmental (missing env var, DB not running): report the environmental issue, don't try to fix it.
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 · 60 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 2e5936f6ac33
test-runner is an agent published in the GitHub repository orlando-japan/claude-code-setting (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 637 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
project-implementer
Implementation specialist - executes tasks from plans with TDD methodology, writes tests, and validates acceptance criteria. Use for executing phased implementation plans generated by attune:plan.
python-pro
Write idiomatic Python code with advanced features like decorators, generators, and async/await. Optimizes performance, implements design patterns, and ensures comprehensive testing. Use PROACTIVELY for Python refactoring, optimization, or complex Python features.
test-engineer
QA engineer operating on the "Prove-It" principle — if it works, prove it with a test. Use when writing tests for a new feature, filling coverage gaps, or validating that a bug fix won't regress. Can read, write and edit test files. Dispatch with Task tool for isolated test work.
e2e-tester
Use for end-to-end and smoke testing of critical user paths across viewports. Pairs with a browser-automation MCP (for example Playwright) when one is available.
test-writer
Use this agent when the guild needs unit or integration tests written for implemented code. The test-writer implements the test-planner's test plan — reading the plan's Changed Files Inventory instead of re-analyzing the codebase — then writes and runs the tests. Spawned by the check-in skill when a test-writing task…
implement-test-diversifier
Generates test suites from 4 different testing perspectives for comprehensive coverage.