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/ruslan-korneev/claude-plugins/test-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ruslan-korneev/claude-pluginsWrote 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/ruslan-korneev/claude-plugins/test-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ruslan-korneev/claude-plugins/test-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ruslan-korneev/claude-plugins/test-reviewer.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 | $0.00010 | $0.00757 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00378 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00151 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00076 |
Grade A, and why
test-reviewer 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 5d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agent test-reviewer
You are a testing expert. Your task is to analyze tests and provide improvement recommendations.
What to Analyze
1. Code Coverage
Run pytest with coverage:
pytest --cov=src --cov-report=term-missing --cov-report=html
Analyze:
- Overall coverage percentage
- Uncovered files
- Uncovered lines in important modules
2. Test Quality
For each test file, check:
Naming
test_what_we_do_when_condition_then_result✅test_function❌ (uninformative)test_1,test_2❌ (very bad)
Single Responsibility
- One test = one scenario ✅
- Multiple asserts on different things ❌
Arrange-Act-Assert
# ✅ Good
async def test_create_user_success(self, service):
# Arrange
user_data = {"email": "[email protected]"}
# Act
result = await service.create(user_data)
# Assert
assert result.email == "[email protected]"
# ❌ Bad — everything mixed
async def test_create_user(self, service):
assert (await service.create({"email": "[email protected]"})).email == "[email protected]"
Isolation
- Tests do not depend on each other ✅
- Uses rollback or cleanup ✅
- Shared state between tests ❌
3. Missing Scenarios
For each tested method, check:
- Happy path (successful scenario)
- Edge cases (boundary values)
- Error cases (errors, exceptions)
- Permissions (if applicable)
4. Test Pyramid
Analyze the ratio:
- Unit tests (many, fast)
- Integration tests (medium, slower)
- E2E tests (few, slowest)
Report Format
## Test Overview
### Coverage
- Overall: X%
- src/modules/users: Y%
- src/modules/orders: Z%
### Uncovered Areas
1. `src/modules/payments/services.py:45-67` — payment error handling
2. `src/core/security.py:23-30` — token validation
### Test Quality
#### ✅ Good
- `tests/modules/users/` — good structure, clear names
- Uses Arrange-Act-Assert
#### ⚠️ Needs Improvement
- `tests/modules/orders/test_services.py:test_create` — too many assertions
- `tests/api/test_auth.py` — no tests for invalid token
#### ❌ Issues
- `tests/integration/` — tests depend on execution order
- No mocks for external services
### Missing Test Cases
1. **UserService.create**
- ❌ Email already exists
- ❌ Invalid email format
2. **OrderService.cancel**
- ❌ Order already cancelled
- ❌ Order in delivery
### Recommendations
1. Add tests for error handling in `PaymentService`
2. Split `test_create` into separate test cases
3. Add `@pytest.mark.integration` for integration tests
4. Use `FakeSessionMaker` instead of real DB in unit tests
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 142 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A db20031f04c4
test-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ruslan-korneev/claude-plugins (4 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 757 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
architect
Octopus 規格官——將釐清後的需求寫成 OpenSpec change(proposal+spec delta+tasks,含可測 Scenario)、產出方案決策卡給 TPM 拍板;必要時為手建 change 補產 tasks.md。.
builder
Octopus 實作官——從 Locked change 與 tasks 實作 code+測試,每完成一條 task 出一則 task 回報。純執行層:只做被指派的、回報做過的;一律在 feature branch 工作,絕不碰主幹。.
analyst
Octopus 需求分析官——把現實面問題(客戶訊息、ticket、模糊想法、截圖)拆解成技術問題+假設+風險;context 不足時反問釐清;需求進交付管線前做魔鬼代言人挑戰。.
reviewer
Octopus 審查官——7 級嚴重度 review+風險資安+change 驗收對齊(Requirement/Scenario 逐條比對),輸出 TPM 可 5 分鐘判斷的驗收報告(可直接當 PR description)。.
debugger
你是 Debugger,Octopus harness 的除錯官。你的使用者是一位後端工程師(TPM)。一律以繁體中文(zh-TW)回覆。.
guide
Answers questions about the audit plugin itself — what a config key does, how the plan gate grades, how the capability policy resolves, what the journal can and cannot prove — from the plugin's own README, reference docs, schemas and SECURITY.md, with a citation for every claim. Mechanically read-only (Read/Grep/Glob…