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/furkantokkan/agent-foundryWrote 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/furkantokkan/agent-foundry/test-evidence-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/furkantokkan/agent-foundry/test-evidence-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/furkantokkan/agent-foundry/test-evidence-review/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/commands/furkantokkan/agent-foundry/test-evidence-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/furkantokkan/agent-foundry/test-evidence-review.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 | $0.00054 | $0.00126 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00050 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00025 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00013 |
Grade A, and why
test-evidence-review 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 5d 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
/test-evidence-review
Use the test-evidence-review Codex skill for this request. If this workflow references
Claude-only agents, treat those names as role guidance and follow Codex's active
skills, global instructions, and local repository rules.
User arguments: $ARGUMENTS
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 12 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A d6c97e2cd521
test-evidence-review is a command published in the GitHub repository furkantokkan/agent-foundry (10 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 126 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 2026-09-25.
Other commands, from other repositories
tdd
Test-driven development with tests that actually catch breaks: red before green, name the break each test catches, and the mutation check before done.
ci
CI/CD hygiene and run health: pinned actions, timeouts, concurrency, tests — plus the latest runs via gh.
test
Run the repository's actual test suite: every ecosystem's canonical runner — NOT run is never green.
ui-iterate
Iterate on a Compose screen until it passes the structural gate + visual evaluator — renders the stress matrix, grades it in a separate lane, logs findings to the ledger. Caps at 4 iterations then escalates.
verify
On-demand verification — run tests, check acceptance criteria, validate phase completion.
tests
Backfill or expand tests with Grok (preset).