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/jpeseWang/solo-dev-workflowWrote 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/jpesewang/solo-dev-workflow/test)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/jpesewang/solo-dev-workflow/test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jpesewang/solo-dev-workflow/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/commands/jpesewang/solo-dev-workflow/test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jpesewang/solo-dev-workflow/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 | $0.00000 | $0.00726 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00290 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00145 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00073 |
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 2mo 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 — 84 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Write tests
Generate or strengthen tests for the changed code, then run them.
Add the test that would have caught the bug, or that locks in the new behavior. Match the project's existing testing setup — don't introduce a new framework.
Input: an optional target.
- none → test the code in the current uncommitted diff
path/to/file→ test that file- a description → test that behavior
Step 1 — Detect the test setup
Figure out what the project already uses before writing anything:
# JS/TS
grep -lE '"(jest|vitest|mocha|@playwright/test|node:test)"' package.json 2>/dev/null
ls vitest.config.* jest.config.* playwright.config.* 2>/dev/null
# Python
ls pytest.ini pyproject.toml tox.ini 2>/dev/null && grep -l pytest pyproject.toml 2>/dev/null
# Go
ls go.mod 2>/dev/null # go test, *_test.go
# Find sibling tests to copy the convention from
git ls-files | grep -iE '(\.test\.|\.spec\.|_test\.|/__tests__/|/tests?/)' | head -20
Adopt the existing file naming, folder location, and assertion style. If there is genuinely no test setup, say so and propose the smallest reasonable one — don't install it without asking.
Step 2 — Identify what to test
From the target, list the behaviors worth covering, prioritized:
- The happy path (the main thing the code does).
- Edge cases: empty/zero/negative, boundaries, missing optional inputs.
- Error paths: what happens when a dependency throws or returns a failure.
- Any regression — if this change is a bug fix, write the test that fails on the old code.
Skip trivial getters/passthroughs and generated code. Don't chase a coverage number; chase the cases that actually break.
Step 3 — Write the tests
- One clear behavior per test; name it so a failure reads like a sentence.
- Arrange / act / assert. Mock only true external boundaries (network, clock, fs) — don't mock the unit under test.
- Reuse existing fixtures/helpers/builders rather than duplicating setup.
Step 4 — Run them
Run the suite (or just the new file) using the project's test command. Report honestly:
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 84 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A c67911a16e19
test is a command published in the GitHub repository jpeseWang/solo-dev-workflow (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 726 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
prototype
You are building a proof-of-concept for the current Grainulator sprint. Read CLAUDE.md for sprint context and claims.json for existing research claims.
qa-changes
This skill should be used when the user asks to "QA a pull request", "test PR changes", "verify a PR works", "functionally test changes", or when an automated workflow triggers QA validation of code changes. Provides a structured methodology for setting up the environment, exercising changed behavior, and reporting…
verify
Run repository verification using the verification-loop skill.
modernize-transform
Transform one legacy module to the target stack — idiomatic rewrite with behavior-equivalence tests.
constraints
A command for defining a project's quality standards through a short interview and a written CONSTRAINTS.md file. It records checks, thresholds, exceptions, and commands for enforcing them.
check-dev
Type-check a Z specification with fuzz.