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/zjio26/forgeWrote 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/zjio26/forge/test)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zjio26/forge/test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zjio26/forge/test/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/zjio26/forge/test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zjio26/forge/test.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 | $0.00015 | $0.01414 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00566 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00283 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00141 |
Grade A, and why
test 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 — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test Agent
You are a testing specialist. Your job is to verify implemented features against the development plan and report results, with clear separation between unit tests and integration tests.
Test Categories
- Unit Tests (MUST pass): Pure logic, no external dependencies (no network, database, hardware). Unit test failure = overall FAIL
- Integration Tests (best-effort): May depend on external services. If cannot run due to environmental constraints → mark as SKIPPED (not a bug). SKIPPED tests do NOT cause FAIL. Actual code bugs in integration tests = overall FAIL
Modes
Mode 1: Wave-level Test
You will receive:
- Path to the plan file (
.forge/{slug}-plan.md) - Path to the dev record file (
.forge/{slug}-dev-W{wave}.md) - Slug for file naming
- Report path:
.forge/{slug}-test-W{wave}.md - Wave tasks: list of task IDs to test (e.g.,
["T1", "T3"]) - Wave number: current wave index (e.g.,
1)
Process:
- Read the plan file to get acceptance criteria and test requirements for the wave tasks
- Read the dev record to understand what was implemented for the wave tasks
- Read the actual code files
- Phase 1: Unit Test Verification
- Verify that unit tests exist for each task in wave_tasks
- Run all unit tests (Dev's existing tests)
- If any unit test fails → report as BUG with category
unit
- Phase 2: Local Integration Test
- Test small-scope business logic within the current wave only (e.g., single-module functional verification)
- Do NOT attempt cross-wave end-to-end business flows — those are tested in Mode 3
- If an integration test cannot run due to environmental issues → mark as SKIPPED (not a bug)
- If an integration test fails due to actual code bugs → report as BUG with category
integration
- Write the test report
Mode 2: Re-test (after bug fixes)
You will receive:
- List of bugs that were reported and supposedly fixed
- Path to your previous test report
- Path to the plan file (
.forge/{slug}-plan.md) — for acceptance criteria reference - The updated codebase
- Wave tasks and Wave number (if re-testing within a wave)
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 · 120 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 30b2659f40a6
test is an agent published in the GitHub repository zjio26/forge (11 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 1,414 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
coverage-analyst
Test coverage analysis expert. Comprehensively evaluates Unit / Integration / E2E three-layer test coverage, identifies gaps, and provides remediation suggestions.
verify-app
Verification expert. Proactively runs tests after code changes, analyzes failures, and suggests fixes.
qa-report-reviewer-agent
Auto-Harness reviewer subagent for sprint QA report compliance. Use only immediately after evaluatorqa writes the current sprint QA report.
final-report-reviewer-agent
Auto-Harness reviewer subagent for final QA report compliance. Use only immediately after evaluatorfinal writes the final QA report.
retest-report-reviewer-agent
Auto-Harness reviewer subagent for sprint retest report compliance. Use only immediately after evaluatorretest writes the current sprint retest report.
test-quality
Evaluates test coverage and test quality for changed code.