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/saajunaid/caddis-pluginWrote 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/saajunaid/caddis-plugin/pytest-coverage)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/saajunaid/caddis-plugin/pytest-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/saajunaid/caddis-plugin/pytest-coverage/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/saajunaid/caddis-plugin/pytest-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/saajunaid/caddis-plugin/pytest-coverage.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 | $0.00011 | $0.00487 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00195 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00097 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
pytest-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 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.
What it actually says
Pytest Coverage Improvement
Run pytest with coverage analysis and iteratively add tests until all lines are covered.
Instructions
Step 1: Generate Coverage Report
Run pytest with annotated coverage output:
pytest --cov --cov-report=annotate:cov_annotate
To scope to a specific module:
pytest --cov=<module_name> --cov-report=annotate:cov_annotate
To run specific test files:
pytest tests/test_<module>.py --cov=<module_name> --cov-report=annotate:cov_annotate
Step 2: Identify Uncovered Lines
Open the cov_annotate/ directory. Each source file has a corresponding annotated file:
- Lines starting with
!(exclamation mark) are not covered by tests. - Files with 100% coverage can be skipped.
Step 3: Add Missing Tests
For each file with less than 100% coverage:
- Open the annotated file and identify all
!-marked lines. - Determine what test cases would exercise those code paths:
- Conditional branches (if/elif/else)
- Exception handlers (try/except)
- Edge cases (empty inputs, None values, boundary conditions)
- Error paths (invalid arguments, missing data)
- Write focused tests that specifically target the uncovered lines.
- Follow existing test conventions in the project (fixtures, naming, structure).
Step 4: Verify and Iterate
Re-run the coverage command after adding tests. Repeat steps 2-3 until all lines are covered.
Step 5: Clean Up
After reaching target coverage:
- Remove the
cov_annotate/directory (or add it to.gitignore) - Ensure all new tests pass independently:
pytest tests/ -v
Tips
- Prefer testing behavior over implementation details.
- Use
pytest.raises()to cover exception paths. - Use
@pytest.mark.parametrizeto cover multiple branches concisely. - Mock external dependencies (database, APIs) to test error-handling paths.
- If a line is genuinely unreachable, mark it with
# pragma: no cover.
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 · 67 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A ca93e57564cf
pytest-coverage is a command published in the GitHub repository saajunaid/caddis-plugin (0 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 487 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-09-09.
Other commands, from other repositories
validate-content
Run all content validators locally — same gates the CI workflow pack-content.yml enforces.
test-feature
Test a React Native feature on the running simulator/emulator. Verifies UI, user flows, and internal state. Generates a persistent Maestro test file.
python-scaffold
Generate a fresh project skeleton, tests and lint config included. TRIGGER WHEN: the user asks to start a new Python project, bootstrap FastAPI/Django/CLI/library structure, or set up uv+pytest+ruff from scratch. DO NOT TRIGGER WHEN: adding to an existing project (use python-engineer).
run-workflow
Validate and establish the proven rn-dev-agent operating sequence before a real React Native journey — declared package manager and dependencies, read-only inventory, typed session recovery, one exclusive device, managed integration and Metro, only the requested proof, reverse-order cleanup.
comprehensive-unit-testing-with-pytest
Aims for high test coverage using pytest, testing both common and edge cases.
rust-test
Rust TDD workflow with unit and property tests.