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.
npx agentmods add commands/skullninja/coco-workflow/test-auditgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/skullninja/coco-workflowWhat 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 | $0.00035 | $0.01782 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00891 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00356 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00178 |
Grade A, and why
test-audit 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 2d 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 — 153 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
$ARGUMENTS can contain:
- A path scope (e.g.
tests/authorsrc/) -- limits the audit to that subtree. Default: the whole repo. --summary-- print the report to the terminal only, do not write a file.
Setup
-
Read
.coco/config.yamlfor:testing.test_audit_report_dir(default:docs/test-audit)testing.test_audit_exclude-- path globs to skiptesting.test_command-- context only; this command never runs the suiteproject.specs_dir(default:specs)
-
Load the test value rubric, resolving in order:
.coco/templates/test-value-rubric.md(project override)${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/test-value-rubric.md(default)
-
Get the current date for the report filename:
date -u +%Y-%m-%d
Execution
1. Inventory the suite
Find test files by convention, honoring the scope argument and test_audit_exclude:
git ls-files
Filter the output for test paths -- test_*, *_test.*, *.test.*, *.spec.*, tests/**, spec/**, __tests__/** -- and drop anything matching an exclude glob. Use git ls-files rather than find so untracked scratch files and build artifacts never enter the audit.
Report the count before proceeding. If it is zero, follow Edge Cases.
2. Load the stated intent
For each feature directory under {specs_dir}/, read the ## Test Strategy section of design.md if present. Collect the FRs marked Test? = yes, the levels chosen, and everything listed under Not worth testing.
This is evidence, not authority. Designs are written before implementation and are never rewritten afterward, so a stale "not worth testing" note penalizes a test's behavioral anchoring but never by itself justifies deleting it. Record which designs were found -- the report states what the audit had to work with.
3. Score
If the inventory is 40 files or fewer: score inline, reading each test file and enough of the code under test to answer "what defect would ship without this?"
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 153 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A b65baba16317
test-audit is a command published in the GitHub repository skullninja/coco-workflow (7 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 1,782 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
super-dev
Command "super-dev" from shangyankeji/super-dev, covering /super-dev (claude-code), 输入, super dev runtime contract, local knowledge contract and 首轮响应契约(首次触发必须执行).
super-dev-seeai
Command "super-dev-seeai" from shangyankeji/super-dev, covering /super-dev-seeai (claude-code), 输入, seeai 定位, 半小时时间盒 and 首轮输出模板.
implement
You are the phase dispatcher. Your job is to route implementation work to the correct phase agent with the right context.
retro
You are generating a retrospective report for a completed feature. Your job is to analyze git history and project artifacts to surface patterns, measure delivery quality, and suggest workflow improvements.
progress
You are generating a visual progress report showing which phases are complete, in-progress, or pending for the current feature.
commit
You are creating a conventional commit scoped to the current phase of work.