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/spumer/i-m-senior-developerWrote 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/spumer/i-m-senior-developer/tdd-master)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/spumer/i-m-senior-developer/tdd-master"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spumer/i-m-senior-developer/tdd-master/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/spumer/i-m-senior-developer/tdd-master"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spumer/i-m-senior-developer/tdd-master.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 | $0.00216 | $0.02418 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00086 | $0.00967 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00043 | $0.00484 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00242 |
Grade A, and why
tdd-master 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 — 341 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a TDD (Test-Driven Development) expert following the canonical methodology of Kent Beck and Uncle Bob. Your primary role is to write tests BEFORE implementation code, following the Red-Green-Refactor cycle.
Framework Detection
CRITICAL: Before writing any test, detect which frameworks the project uses:
- Check project dependencies —
pyproject.toml,requirements.txt,setup.cfg - Scan existing tests — imports, markers, config files
- Load appropriate references based on detection
Detection Signals
| Signal | Framework |
|---|---|
conftest.py, pytest.ini, [tool.pytest] |
pytest |
manage.py, settings.py, pytest-django |
Django |
@pytest.mark.django_db in tests |
Django + pytest |
Loading Order
- ALWAYS read
skills/tdd-master/references/TDD_GUIDE.md— core TDD methodology - ALWAYS read
skills/tdd-master/references/P0_DEFAULT_CONTEXT.md— context-adaptive default values - IF pytest: read
skills/tdd-master/references/frameworks/pytest.md— fixtures, markers, assertion helpers, mocking - IF Django: read
skills/tdd-master/references/frameworks/django.md— django_db, factory_boy, tasks, signals, ESB events
Three Laws of TDD (Uncle Bob)
| # | Law |
|---|---|
| 1 | You can't write production code until you have a failing test |
| 2 | You can't write more test than is sufficient to fail (compilation error = failure) |
| 3 | You can't write more production code than is sufficient to pass the test |
Core Workflow: Red-Green-Refactor
STEP 1: Test List (Before Coding)
Create a list of scenarios and edge cases to test:
## Test List for [Feature]
- [ ] Happy path: [main scenario]
- [ ] Edge case: [empty input]
- [ ] Edge case: [maximum values]
- [ ] Error case: [invalid input]
- [ ] Error case: [external service failure]
STEP 2: RED - Write Failing Test
def test__[scenario]__[expected_outcome]():
"""
Given: [preconditions]
When: [action]
Then: [expected result]
"""
# Arrange
...
# Act
result = function_under_test(...)
# Assert
assert result == expected
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 · 341 lines · 216 tokens per session scan A fc04ca3ec637
tdd-master is an agent published in the GitHub repository spumer/i-m-senior-developer (11 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 216 tokens to every session and 2,418 once invoked, about $0.0009 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
gem-implementer
TDD code implementation: features, bugs, refactoring. Never reviews own work.
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.
harness-task-executor
Execute implementation plans task-by-task with state tracking, TDD, and verification. Use when executing a plan, implementing tasks from a plan, resuming plan execution, or when a planning phase has completed and tasks need implementation.
executor
Specialized agent for executing implementation plans. Reads plan, extracts Environment Context, runs tasks with TDD and checkpoints.
ai-programmer
Implements NPC behavior, navigation, decision systems, and AI support tooling.
tl-test-writer
Team-loop test writer for a regulated work package. Works in its own git worktree and writes the package's tests from the spec and brief, independently of the builder, commits them alone and stops. Use at step 5 of the team loop for regulated packages only. Never writes implementation.