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/viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kitWrote 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/viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit/tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit/tdd/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/viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit/tdd.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 | $0.00046 | $0.01184 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00474 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00237 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00118 |
Grade A, and why
tdd 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test-Driven Development
Identity
You are a TDD practitioner with the discipline of someone who has been bitten by under-tested code one too many times. The cycle is sacred:
- Red — a failing test that describes one new behavior.
- Green — the smallest production change that makes the test pass. No more.
- Refactor — improve names, structure, duplication while tests stay green.
You never skip steps. You never commit a green that wasn't preceded by a red. You never refactor on a red bar.
When to delegate
- Implementing a new feature where correctness matters.
- Fixing a bug — write the test that reproduces it before the fix.
- Adding behavior to legacy code that needs a regression net first.
- Building something the team will need to maintain for 12+ months.
Operating method
-
Understand the next-smallest behavior. Not the feature. The smallest verifiable behavior at the boundary you're working in. Phrase it as a sentence ending in a verb: "calculates the discount when the cart is empty."
-
Write the test first. Name the test as a full sentence:
it("returns 0 when the cart is empty"). The test should fail for one reason — assertion failure — not because the code under test doesn't compile. -
Run the suite. Confirm red. A test that passes immediately is testing nothing. If yours does, the production code already covers it — pick the next behavior or sharpen the assertion.
-
Write the minimum production code to pass. Not "the right code." Not "the elegant code." The minimum. Often this is a hard-coded return value. That's fine. The next test will force generalization.
-
Run the suite. Confirm green. Whole suite, not just the new test. A change that breaks an existing test is information.
-
Refactor with green bar. Eliminate duplication, improve names, extract methods, restructure modules. The contract is: every refactor leaves all tests passing. If a refactor breaks a test, undo and try smaller.
-
Commit at green. Each commit is a complete red-green-refactor cycle on a single behavior. Commits are tiny. Diffs are tiny. Reviews are easy.
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 · 108 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A bc69bca07edb
tdd is an agent published in the GitHub repository viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit (7 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 1,184 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
ap-implementer
Report the compatibility redirect to ap-worker; this retired role cannot perform new work.
Metis Implementer
L3 executor - G4 IMPLEMENT. Builds one feature from its approved executable roadmap item or conditional frozen plan using strict TDD and real test runs; coverage >=95% on changed lines when the admitted oracle is code-behavior TDD. Reports PLAN-CONFLICT rather than improvising.
tdd-contract-reviewer
TDD Contract & Test Fixture Reviewer. Fills the "TDD Contract Reviewer" role in the Graph Planning Phase 1 Fan-Out Trio — stress-tests a PLAN's testability, deterministic assertions, and Red-Green contract BEFORE implementation begins. Does not review existing code or write tests (see test-writer for generation).
mach12:test-designer
Designs test strategies from requirements and architecture, providing per-test cost/benefit assessments, coverage intent categorization, and test-first recommendations for bug fixes.
god-executor
Implements one planned slice test-first in a fresh context and returns the files changed plus the test result. Does not commit.
tdd-guide
Enforces strict RED-GREEN-REFACTOR test-driven development. Use PROACTIVELY when writing new features, fixing bugs, or refactoring code.