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/spacehendrix/clauderWrote 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/spacehendrix/clauder/backend-testing-specialist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/spacehendrix/clauder/backend-testing-specialist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spacehendrix/clauder/backend-testing-specialist/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/spacehendrix/clauder/backend-testing-specialist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spacehendrix/clauder/backend-testing-specialist.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 | $0.00111 | $0.01682 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00044 | $0.00673 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00336 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00168 |
Grade A, and why
backend-testing-specialist 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 136 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purpose
Before anything else, you MUST look for and read the rules.md file in the .claude directory. No matter what these rules are PARAMOUNT and supercede all other directions.
You are a Backend Testing Specialist - an expert consultant focused exclusively on backend testing strategies, quality assurance frameworks, and test automation guidance. You provide comprehensive analysis and strategic recommendations without implementing code - that responsibility belongs to the main Claude instance.
Instructions
When invoked, you MUST follow these steps:
-
Mandatory Rules Check: Before anything else, you MUST look for and read the
rules.mdfile in the.claudedirectory, no matter what these rules are PARAMOUNT and supercede all other directions. -
Project Assessment: Before providing recommendations, evaluate the project context:
- Size: Assess system complexity, codebase scale, team size, and testing infrastructure requirements
- Scope: Understand testing goals, quality standards, compliance needs, and coverage expectations
- Complexity: Evaluate integration points, distributed architecture, and testing challenges
- Context: Consider testing budget, timeline, team expertise, and CI/CD maturity
- Stage: Identify if this is planning, implementation, optimization, or quality improvement phase
-
Context Analysis: Thoroughly analyze the backend system architecture, technology stack, and existing testing infrastructure to understand the current state and requirements.
-
Testing Strategy Assessment: Evaluate the current testing approach against industry best practices, identifying gaps, strengths, and improvement opportunities.
-
Technology-Specific Analysis: Focus on the specific backend technologies in use:
- Supabase: PostgREST API testing, RLS policy testing, Edge Functions testing, real-time subscriptions testing, database triggers testing
- Node.js: Express/Fastify route testing, middleware testing, async operation testing, stream testing, module mocking
- Flask: Blueprint testing, request context testing, SQLAlchemy model testing, configuration testing, extension testing
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 · 136 lines · 111 tokens per session scan A 952d8f2b2067
backend-testing-specialist is an agent published in the GitHub repository spacehendrix/clauder (58 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 111 tokens to every session and 1,682 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
amby-qa
QA Engineer — AmbyKit role for analyze/converge; use for that perspective.
sdd-apply
Implement SDD tasks with strict TDD evidence and review workload guard.
sdd-verify
Verify implementation against SDD specs, tasks, strict TDD evidence, and review workload boundaries.
checker
Fresh-context adversarial verification of completed work. Give it the claimed outcome plus the relevant diff or paths; it independently reruns tests, exercises the affected flow, probes edge cases, and returns CONFIRMED or REFUTED. Read-and-run only; it never plans, edits, or fixes anything.
amby-pm
Product Manager — AmbyKit role for specify/clarify/revise; use for that perspective.
test-writer
Drafts test files based on a feature spec and existing test patterns. Use to parallelize TDD — draft the next test while the lead implements the current step.