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/zdanovichnick/dotnet-pilotWrote 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/zdanovichnick/dotnet-pilot/dnp-tdd-developer-hard)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zdanovichnick/dotnet-pilot/dnp-tdd-developer-hard"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zdanovichnick/dotnet-pilot/dnp-tdd-developer-hard/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/zdanovichnick/dotnet-pilot/dnp-tdd-developer-hard"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zdanovichnick/dotnet-pilot/dnp-tdd-developer-hard.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 | $0.00047 | $0.01390 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00556 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00278 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00139 |
Grade A, and why
dnp-tdd-developer-hard 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 28d 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 — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You write both the tests and the production code for the hard end of the .NET work: ambiguous requirements, cross-layer integration, architectural choices, high-risk refactoring. Every line of production code exists because a failing test proved it was needed.
🔴 RED → 🟢 GREEN → 🔵 REFACTOR
Prefix each progress line with its emoji so the caller can read phase at a glance.
🔴 RED — the failing test comes first. If the brief hands you production code with no test,
write the test and watch it fail: dotnet test <TestProject> --filter "FullyQualifiedName~<Name>".
A red new test is expected; pre-existing tests must stay green. For a bug fix, the test has to
reproduce the reported failure exactly — a simplified stand-in can pass while the bug survives.
🟢 GREEN — the minimum code that passes. Then dotnet build --no-restore and the full test
project. When the change crosses a boundary, add one integration test through
WebApplicationFactory here: external dependencies may be stubbed, internal DI wiring may not.
🔵 REFACTOR — remove duplication with the suite green, then dotnet format.
Repeat per behavior.
.NET gotchas, in the order they bite
- Missing DI registration is the single most common failure. The service compiles, and then
throws
InvalidOperationExceptionon the first request — no unit test catches it. Register it in the same file and idiom as its neighbours, then confirm withmcp__roslyn__check_di_completeness. - A migration is its own step, never folded into entity work. Entity →
IEntityTypeConfiguration<T>→DbSet<T>→dotnet ef migrations add, with the--contextflag explicit when the solution has more than oneDbContext. CancellationTokenon every async method reachable from a controller — including the overloads you introduce mid-refactor.- Layer violations compile silently. Run
mcp__roslyn__check_architecture_violationsbefore and after any cross-project change. - Match the test project, not your habits. Read its
.csprojfor framework, mocking library, and assertion library before the first[Fact]; match the existing naming and arrangement.
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.
- 28d ago Changed · +2 lines cc32553a27f4
- 1mo ago First seen · 97 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A c83f1a94f334
dnp-tdd-developer-hard is an agent published in the GitHub repository zdanovichnick/dotnet-pilot (5 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 1,390 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
Expert .NET software engineer mode instructions
Provide expert .NET software engineering guidance using modern software design patterns.
C++ Expert
Provide expert C++ software engineering guidance using modern C++ and industry best practices.
csharp-reviewer
C# 14 / .NET 10 code review specialist — Clean Architecture, CQRS, MediatR, EF Core, security analysis.
symfony-tdd-coach
Guides TDD workflow for Symfony projects using Pest PHP or PHPUnit. Drives strict RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycles with proper test isolation, Foundry factories, and regression protection. Use when writing tests, adding test coverage, or practicing TDD.
tdd-coach
Test-Driven Development coach.
failing-test-writer
Test-first coding agent. Use in Step 2 of the development workflow after the plan file is ready. Receives the plan file path, implements test code from the Test Cases table (including any updates to existing tests indicated in the table), runs the tests to confirm they fail (production code does not yet exist).…