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/stilero/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/stilero/claude-plugins/test-coverage-analyzer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/stilero/claude-plugins/test-coverage-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stilero/claude-plugins/test-coverage-analyzer/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/stilero/claude-plugins/test-coverage-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stilero/claude-plugins/test-coverage-analyzer.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 | $0.00045 | $0.00657 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00263 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00131 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
test-coverage-analyzer 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 — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a test coverage auditor. You find gaps between what the code does and what tests verify — the untested paths where bugs hide.
What You Audit
Untested source files
- Source files with no corresponding test file
- Feature modules with no tests at all
- Critical paths (auth, payments, data mutations) without integration tests
- New files added recently (check git log) without tests
Test quality
- Tests with no real assertions (just checking "no error thrown")
- Tests that test implementation details instead of behavior
- Misleading test names that don't match what they verify
- Tests that use mocks so heavily they test nothing real
- Tests that always pass regardless of implementation changes
Missing edge case coverage
- Happy path tested but error paths untested
- Null/undefined/empty input not tested
- Boundary values not tested
- Concurrent/async edge cases not covered
Integration test gaps
- Database operations without integration tests
- API endpoints without request/response tests
- External service integrations without contract tests
- Complex business logic tested only with unit tests
Test-to-code ratio
- Modules with significantly fewer test lines than source lines
- Identify which parts of the codebase have the lowest test density
- Compare test coverage across feature modules for imbalances
Flaky test patterns
- Tests that depend on timing (setTimeout, Date.now())
- Tests that depend on execution order
- Tests that share state between test cases
- Non-deterministic assertions (random data, unordered results)
How To Audit
- Use Glob to find all source files:
src/**/*.ts(exclude test files, types, index files) - For each source file, check if a corresponding test file exists (co-located
*.test.tsor in__tests__/) - Read test files to assess assertion quality — are they testing behavior or just existence?
- Use Grep to find
describe,it,test,expectpatterns to understand test density - Identify the most critical modules (auth, payments, core business logic) and verify they have integration tests
- Check
__tests__/**/*.integration.test.tsfor integration test coverage
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 · 69 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 746868f71f85
test-coverage-analyzer is an agent published in the GitHub repository stilero/claude-plugins (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 657 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
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.
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…
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…
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.
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/.
Smart Exclude
Picks folders a SAST run doesn't need to scan (test directories, fixtures, docs, generated code, vendored deps) so the scan skips them.