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/bovinphang/frontend-craftWrote 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/commands/bovinphang/frontend-craft/fec-tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/bovinphang/frontend-craft/fec-tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/bovinphang/frontend-craft/fec-tdd.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00000 | $0.00237 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00118 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00047 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00024 |
Grade A, and why
fec-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 4d 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.
What it actually says
Perform test-driven development as per fec-tdd-workflow.
Execution steps
- Identify the front-end behavior to be verified.
- Select the test layer for the nearest risk: Unit, Component, Lightweight Integration, or E2E.
- Write a minimum failure test and run it to confirm that the failure reason is correct.
- Write the minimum implementation to make the test pass.
- Keep the tests passed before refactoring.
- Summarize test orders, coverage actions, and remaining risks.
Diversion
- Component and hook testing:
fec-component-testing - Cross-page browser process:
fec-e2e-testing - Test layering strategy:
fec-testing-strategy
Boundary
Use this command for new observable behavior and behavior-changing bug fixes. For pure behavior-preserving refactoring, do not invent a RED test: characterize the already-correct behavior and keep it GREEN → REFACTOR → GREEN.
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.
- 4d ago Changed · +5 lines 091e99807e77
- 8d ago First seen · 21 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 18371d2726bb
fec-tdd is a command published in the GitHub repository bovinphang/frontend-craft (21 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 237 tokens. 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 commands, from other repositories
crystallize
Promote extracted incident knowledge into global patterns and agent improvements.
audit
Audit an existing codebase. Detects stack, finds gaps, creates tasks, generates PROJECT.md.
prompt-evolve
Closed prompt-evolution loop: turn a lesson into a candidate agent prompt, gate it on held-out evals, promote only if it beats the baseline. SIA Meta→Target→Feedback ported to greatcto.
bugfix
TDD-driven bugfix workflow: tester writes failing test (RED) → developer fixes (GREEN) → developer refactors (REFACTOR) → reviewer validates. Accepts issue number, description, or both. Auto-creates PR unless --no-pr flag is passed.
dead-code-scan
Scan for dead code, unused imports, duplicates, and zombie code across the project.
esp-debug
Help debug ESP32 crashes, hangs, and peripheral issues.