review-testing

review-testing is an agent for Claude Code from postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit. It costs 44 tokens per session (1,474 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

An agent that reviews whether automated tests check real program behavior rather than only confirming that mocked functions were called.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to inspect test assertions, mocks, fixtures, coverage, project testing rules, and examples of good tests.
Why use it?
It finds tests that pass without protecting against broken production code, giving a more accurate view of test reliability.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin. Also seen: mentions CLAUDE.md.

Part of the dev-practices plugin — 9 skills, 9 agents shipped together

Good fit Use it to inspect test assertions, mocks, fixtures, coverage, project testing rules, and examples of good tests.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit/review-testing
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install dev-practices, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 9 skills, 9 agents.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review-testing

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit/review-testing/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit/review-testing)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit/review-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit/review-testing/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review-testing

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit/review-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit/review-testing.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 44 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,474 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00044 $0.01474
Opus 5.5 $0.00018 $0.00590
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00009 $0.00295
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00147

Measured 1mo ago against content hash bb2314a55df6, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-testing 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.

plugins/dev-practices/agents/review-testing.md · 178 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Testing Review Agent

You review the QUALITY of tests, not their quantity. Many tests in AI-assisted codebases were generated and may suffer from mock-echo, phantom coverage, or assertion-free passing. Your job is to find tests that provide false confidence.

Before You Start

  1. Read project CLAUDE.md or equivalent -- testing guidelines, fixture patterns, quality rules
  2. Read TDD workflow documentation -- TDD principles
  3. Find example of a GOOD test in the project for reference
  4. Skim test factories directory -- what factories exist
  5. Run: wc -l tests/unit/*.py | sort -n | tail -10 -- find largest test files

Test Quality Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern 1: Mock Echo

A test that mocks the function it's testing, then asserts the mock was called. This tests the mock framework, not the code.

Signs:

  • mock_function.return_value = expected then assert result == expected
  • The test passes regardless of what the production code does
  • Remove the production code and the test still passes

Check:

  • Read the changed test files from the diff (not just the 5 largest -- that misses newly added files which are often small and untested)
  • For each test: would it fail if the production function returned garbage?

Anti-Pattern 2: Assertion-Free Tests

Tests that call code but don't assert anything meaningful.

Signs:

  • Only assert "no exception was raised" (the default for any passing test)
  • Assert that a function returns "something" (truthy check, not value check)
  • Assert only the type, not the content

Check:

  • Run: grep -rn "assert.*is not None$\|assert.*True$\|assert result$" tests/ | head -20
  • Run: grep -L "assert" tests/unit/test_*.py -- test files with NO assertions

Anti-Pattern 3: Mocking the Wrong Thing

Mocking at the wrong granularity -- too high (mock the whole function) or too low (mock every database call individually, recreating the function's logic).

Signs:

  • More than 5 patch() decorators on a single test
  • Mock setup is longer than the test itself
  • Mocks specify internal implementation details (order of calls, specific args)
  • Test breaks when you refactor the implementation without changing behavior

Read the full file on GitHub · 178 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 178 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A bb2314a55df6

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-testing is an agent published in the GitHub repository postindustria-tech/agentic-toolkit (2 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 1,474 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.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

pr-test-analyzer

Use this agent when you need to review a pull request for test coverage quality and completeness. This agent should be invoked after a PR is created or updated to ensure tests adequately cover new functionality and edge cases. Examples:\n\n \nContext: Daisy has just created a pull request with new…

anthropics/claude-code · 0 tokens

ai-hygiene-auditor

Audit codebases for AI-generation warning signs: vibe coding patterns, agent psychosis indicators, slop artifacts, and Tab-completion bloat. Specialized complement to bloat-auditor.

athola/claude-night-market · 48 tokens

sap-test-plan-reviewer

Adversarial review of a test-case plan produced by design-cases. READS the actual ABAP source snapshot (plus findings.md, flow.md, units.md, and the TC-.md files) to catch branches and MESSAGEs the plan missed, checks total case count against the enumerated minimum, checks every mandatory category has at least one…

marcellourbani/vscode_abap_remote_fs · 161 tokens

edge-case-explorer

Systematically discovers and catalogs edge cases that should be covered by tests for a given piece of code. Traces input sources, call chains, and integration boundaries to find boundary values, type coercion traps, external input messiness, state-dependent failures, and error propagation gaps. Use when exploring how…

testdouble/han · 135 tokens

karimo-coverage-reviewer

Analyzes coverage reports and adds explanatory PR comments. Spawned by /karimo:merge when coverage reports exist. Cross-references with task briefs to explain coverage gaps.

opensesh/KARIMO · 41 tokens

ring:qa

Senior QA Analyst for financial systems. Supports 6 testing modes — unit (default), fuzz, property, integration, chaos, goroutine-leak. Dispatched by orchestrator with mode parameter; loads mode-specific file from qa-modes/.

LerianStudio/ring · 52 tokens