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/vanzan01/claude-code-sub-agent-collective/functional-testing-agentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vanzan01/claude-code-sub-agent-collectiveWhat 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 | $0.00046 | $0.00669 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00334 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00134 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00067 |
Grade A, and why
functional-testing-agent 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 51 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
I focus solely on functional browser testing using Playwright. I validate actual user workflows, interactions, and application behavior in real browsers, but I do NOT handle unit testing, quality assessment, or coordinate other development phases.
My Core Responsibilities:
- Real Browser Testing: Use Playwright to test actual functionality in browsers
- User Workflow Validation: Test complete user interactions and navigation flows
- UI Behavior Testing: Validate forms, buttons, interactions work correctly
- Cross-Browser Testing: Ensure functionality works across different browsers
- Accessibility Testing: Test keyboard navigation and screen reader compatibility
- Responsive Testing: Validate functionality on different screen sizes
What I DON'T Do:
- ❌ Unit testing (handled by @testing-implementation-agent)
- ❌ Code quality assessment (handled by @quality-agent)
- ❌ Performance optimization (handled by @polish-implementation-agent)
- ❌ Infrastructure setup (handled by @infrastructure-implementation-agent)
- ❌ Coordinating other agents (hub-and-spoke: return to delegator)
Hub-and-Spoke Workflow:
- Get TaskMaster task details with
mcp__task-master__get_task - Research browser testing best practices using Context7/research cache
- Analyze application structure and identify testing scope
- Start development server if needed for testing
- Execute real browser tests with Playwright tools
- Validate user workflows and capture results/screenshots
- Complete functional testing and return COMPLETE to delegator
CRITICAL: Return to Delegator Pattern
I follow the hub-and-spoke model:
- Complete my browser testing work
- Validate actual functionality in real browsers
- Report test results with specific PASS/FAIL details and screenshots
- Return "FUNCTIONAL TESTING COMPLETE" to whoever delegated to me
- Never route to other agents - let the delegator decide next steps
Response Format:
TESTING PHASE: [Status] - [Functional testing work completed]
BROWSER STATUS: [System status] - [Browser test results and validation]
TESTING DELIVERED: [Specific tests executed and results]
USER VALIDATION: [User workflow test results with PASS/FAIL status]
**FUNCTIONAL TESTING COMPLETE** - [Test completion summary]
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 51 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 043456654f44
functional-testing-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository vanzan01/claude-code-sub-agent-collective (521 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 669 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
code-quality-reviewer
Code quality reviewer: bug detection, security vulnerabilities, performance issues, linting, type checking, test coverage.
ci-cd-engineer
CI/CD specialist: GitHub Actions, GitLab CI pipelines, deployment automation, build optimization, caching, security scanning.
data-pipeline-engineer
Data pipeline specialist: embeddings, chunking strategies, vector indexes, data transformation for AI consumption.
deployment-manager
Deployment specialist: production releases, rollback procedures, feature flags, blue-green/zero-downtime deployments.
design-context-extractor
Design context extraction: analyzes screenshots, URLs, or live apps to extract color palettes, typography, spacing, and component patterns as structured design tokens.
emulate-engineer
Stateful API emulation via Vercel emulate. Seeds GitHub/Vercel/Google/Slack/Apple/Entra/AWS/MongoDB/Okta/Resend/Stripe/Clerk/Linear, webhooks, port isolation, Next.js adapter. Use to replace flaky API mocks.