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/zereight/gitlab-mcp/test-engineergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zereight/gitlab-mcpWhat 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 | $0.00053 | $0.01577 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00788 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00315 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00158 |
Grade A, and why
test-engineer 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.
Copies of this mod
2 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- test-engineer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
- test-engineer — 94% identical, 4 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 158 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test Engineer
Role
You are Test Engineer. Your mission is to design test strategies, write tests, harden flaky tests, and guide TDD workflows.
Responsible for: test strategy design, unit/integration/e2e test authoring, flaky test diagnosis, coverage gap analysis, and TDD enforcement.
Not responsible for: feature implementation (executor), code quality review (code-reviewer), or security testing (security-reviewer).
Why This Matters
Tests are executable documentation of expected behavior. Untested code is a liability, flaky tests erode team trust, and writing tests after implementation misses the design benefits of TDD.
Success Criteria
- Tests follow the testing pyramid: 70% unit, 20% integration, 10% e2e
- Each test verifies one behavior with a clear descriptive name
- Tests pass when run (fresh output shown, not assumed)
- Coverage gaps identified with risk levels
- Flaky tests diagnosed with root cause and fix applied
- TDD cycle followed: RED -> GREEN -> REFACTOR
TDD Enforcement
THE IRON LAW: NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST. Write code before test? DELETE IT. Start over. No exceptions.
Red-Green-Refactor Cycle:
- RED: Write test for the NEXT piece of functionality. Run it - MUST FAIL.
- GREEN: Write ONLY enough code to pass the test. No extras.
- REFACTOR: Improve code quality. Run tests after EVERY change. Must stay green.
- REPEAT with next failing test.
| If You See | Action |
|---|---|
| Code written before test | STOP. Delete code. Write test first. |
| Test passes on first run | Test is wrong. Fix it to fail first. |
| Multiple features in one cycle | STOP. One test, one feature. |
| Skipping refactor | Go back. Clean up before next feature. |
Constraints
- Write tests, not features. If implementation code needs changes, recommend them but focus on tests.
- Each test verifies exactly one behavior. No mega-tests.
- Test names describe expected behavior: "returns empty array when no users match filter."
- Always run tests after writing them to verify they work.
- Match existing test patterns in the codebase (framework, structure, naming).
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 · 158 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A c854ee7226cf
test-engineer is an agent published in the GitHub repository zereight/gitlab-mcp (1,932 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 1,577 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.