test-coverage

test-coverage is a command for Claude Code, OpenCode from affaan-m/ECC. It costs 5 tokens per session (427 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A command that measures automated test coverage, finds code paths without tests, and proposes tests for the gaps. Test coverage shows which parts of the code the test suite actually exercises.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to run a coverage report, identify weak files or lines, and plan tests for missing cases.
Why use it?
It helps reveal untested behavior and focuses new tests on important areas such as security, authentication, financial logic, and utilities.

Command for Claude CodeOpenCode

Written for Claude Code and OpenCode: $ARGUMENTS substitution, but also installed under .opencode/. Also seen: agent in frontmatter.

Part of the ecc plugin — 70 skills, 56 commands, 68 agents, 1 MCP server shipped together

About the project

ECC is a toolkit that organizes and improves how coding agents work through skills, memory, security checks, research practices, and related extensions. It is for developers using agents such as Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, and Cursor.

affaan-m/ECC · 248,541 stars · on GitHub · ecc.tools

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/affaan-m/ecc/test-coverage
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/affaan-m/ECC

Made for: Claude Code, OpenCode.

Or install ecc, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 70 skills, 56 commands, 68 agents, 1 MCP server.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for test-coverage

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/affaan-m/ecc/test-coverage.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/affaan-m/ecc/test-coverage)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/affaan-m/ecc/test-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/affaan-m/ecc/test-coverage.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 5 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 427 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00005 $0.00427
Opus 5 $0.00003 $0.00214
Sonnet 5 $0.00001 $0.00085
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00043

Measured 2d ago against content hash bb3542aeec9d, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-05, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

test-coverage 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

7 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:

.opencode/commands/test-coverage.md · 81 lines

What it actually says

Test Coverage Command

Analyze test coverage and identify gaps: $ARGUMENTS

Your Task

  1. Run coverage report: npm test -- --coverage
  2. Analyze results - Identify low coverage areas
  3. Prioritize gaps - Critical code first
  4. Generate missing tests - For uncovered code

Coverage Targets

Code Type Target
Standard code 80%
Financial logic 100%
Auth/security 100%
Utilities 90%
UI components 70%

Coverage Report Analysis

Summary

File           | % Stmts | % Branch | % Funcs | % Lines
---------------|---------|----------|---------|--------
All files      |   XX    |    XX    |   XX    |   XX

Low Coverage Files

[Files below target, prioritized by criticality]

Uncovered Lines

[Specific lines that need tests]

Test Generation

For each uncovered area:

[Function/Component Name]

Location: src/path/file.ts:123

Coverage Gap: [description]

Suggested Tests:

describe('functionName', () => {
  it('should [expected behavior]', () => {
    // Test code
  })

  it('should handle [edge case]', () => {
    // Edge case test
  })
})

Coverage Improvement Plan

  1. Critical (add immediately)

    • file1.ts - Auth logic
    • file2.ts - Payment handling
  2. High (add this sprint)

    • file3.ts - Core business logic
  3. Medium (add when touching file)

    • file4.ts - Utilities

IMPORTANT: Coverage is a metric, not a goal. Focus on meaningful tests, not just hitting numbers.

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 81 lines · 5 tokens per session scan A bb3542aeec9d

Subscribe to this mod's changes

test-coverage is a command published in the GitHub repository affaan-m/ECC (248,541 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 5 tokens to every session and 427 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-09-03.