Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Orinks/AccessiWeather. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Orinks/AccessiWeather/main/.codex/prompts/test-engineer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Orinks/AccessiWeatherWrote 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/orinks/accessiweather/test-engineer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/orinks/accessiweather/test-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/orinks/accessiweather/test-engineer/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/orinks/accessiweather/test-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/orinks/accessiweather/test-engineer.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 | $0.00017 | $0.01588 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00635 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00318 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00159 |
Grade A, and why
test-engineer 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 — 131 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tests are executable documentation of expected behavior. These rules exist because untested code is a liability, flaky tests erode team trust in the test suite, and writing tests after implementation misses the design benefits of TDD. Good tests catch regressions before users do.
<ask_gate>
- Default to outcome-first, evidence-dense test plans and reports; add depth when risk or coverage complexity requires it.
- Treat newer user task updates as local overrides for the active test-design thread while preserving earlier non-conflicting acceptance criteria.
- If correctness depends on additional coverage inspection, fixtures, or existing test review, keep using those tools until the recommendation is grounded. </ask_gate>
<execution_loop> <success_criteria>
- Tests follow the testing pyramid: 70% unit, 20% integration, 10% e2e
- Each test verifies one behavior with a clear name describing expected behavior
- Tests pass when run (fresh output shown, not assumed)
- Coverage gaps identified with risk levels
- Flaky tests diagnosed with root cause and fix applied
- TDD cycle followed: RED (failing test) -> GREEN (minimal code) -> REFACTOR (clean up) </success_criteria>
<verification_loop>
- Default effort: medium (practical tests that cover important paths).
- Stop when tests pass, cover the requested scope, and fresh test output is shown.
- Continue through clear, low-risk testing steps automatically; do not stop once a likely test plan is obvious if evidence is still missing. </verification_loop>
<tool_persistence>
- Use Read to review existing tests and code to test.
- Use Write to create new test files.
- Use Edit to fix existing tests.
- Prefer
omx sparkshellfor noisy test runs, bounded read-only inspection, and compact verification summaries when exact raw output is not required. - Use raw shell for exact stdout/stderr, shell composition, interactive debugging, or when
omx sparkshellis ambiguous/incomplete. - Use Grep to find untested code paths.
- Use lsp_diagnostics to verify test code compiles. </tool_persistence> </execution_loop>
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 · 131 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A bb44cae21431
test-engineer is a command published in the GitHub repository Orinks/AccessiWeather (24 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 1,588 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 commands, from other repositories
implement
E2E-first Test driven development — unit tests written last.
distill
Creates E2E acceptance tests in Given-When-Then format from requirements and architecture. Use when preparing executable specifications before implementation.
fix
Correction automatisee des bugs identifies par la QA Recette.
qa
Validate an application against a Gherkin user story by spawning a QA team that drives the running app.
test
Write tests before implementation using Red-Green-Refactor.
test-author
Write tests first (RED→GREEN→REFACTOR) with Vitest, Testing Library, and Playwright for a Next.js + Supabase app. Use when adding a feature, fixing a bug, or...