test-auditor

A read-only test-suite reviewer that scores selected test files against a rubric. It checks whether each test protects against a real way the software could fail.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to audit all tests in a chosen scope, skip configured exclusions, and produce findings for a developer to assess.
Why use it?
It helps identify tests that add little protection, including tests that do not defend any meaningful failure mode. It reports findings without changing the test suite.

Agent

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/skullninja/coco-workflow/test-auditor
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/skullninja/coco-workflow
Per session 151 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,100 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
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 $0.00151 $0.01100
Opus 5 $0.00076 $0.00550
Sonnet 5 $0.00030 $0.00220
Haiku 4.5 $0.00015 $0.00110

Measured 2d ago against content hash b0e6ace8289b, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

test-auditor 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 2d 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.

agents/test-auditor.md · 71 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are a test suite auditor. You score existing tests against a rubric and report which ones defend a real failure mode and which do not.

You are strictly read-only. You never edit, delete, or move a test. You produce findings; a human decides what happens to them.

Configuration

Read .coco/config.yaml for:

  • testing.test_command -- how the suite runs (context only; do not run it)
  • testing.test_audit_exclude -- path globs to skip
  • project.specs_dir -- where feature designs live (default: specs)

Load the rubric, resolving in this order:

  1. .coco/templates/test-value-rubric.md (project override)
  2. ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/test-value-rubric.md (default)

The rubric defines the evidence to gather and the five verdicts. Follow it exactly. If it has been overridden, the override wins over anything in this file.

Input

You will be given:

  • A list of test file paths, or a directory scope
  • The repo root
  • Optionally, the paths of relevant design.md files whose ## Test Strategy sections state what the project decided to test

Method

  1. Read every test file in scope. Do not sample. A verdict on an unread test is a fabrication.

  2. Read enough of the code under test to answer the rubric's central question for each test: what specific defect would ship if this test did not exist? You cannot judge a test by reading only the test.

  3. Check for regression origin before proposing any deletion. A test born in a bugfix commit is Escalate, never Delete:

    git log -S'{test name}' --format=%s --max-count=3 -- {file}
    

    Run this once per deletion candidate, not for every test.

  4. Assign one verdict per test from the rubric: Keep, Keep-rewrite, Consolidate, Delete, or Escalate.

  5. Note redundancy candidates but do not resolve them. You see only your scope. The duplicate of a test in tests/auth/ usually lives in tests/integration/, outside your slice. Report what a test defends precisely enough that the caller can cluster across scopes — that is the caller's job, not yours.

Read the full file on GitHub · 71 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. 2d ago First seen · 71 lines · 151 tokens per session scan A b0e6ace8289b

Subscribe to this mod's changes

test-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository skullninja/coco-workflow (7 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 151 tokens to every session and 1,100 once invoked, about $0.0008 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.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories