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/srnichols/plan-forgeWrote 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/srnichols/plan-forge/new-pester-test)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/srnichols/plan-forge/new-pester-test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/srnichols/plan-forge/new-pester-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/srnichols/plan-forge/new-pester-test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/srnichols/plan-forge/new-pester-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 | $0.00019 | $0.01105 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00553 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00221 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00111 |
Grade A, and why
new-pester-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 today.
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 — 136 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Create New Pester Test
Scaffold a Pester 5 test file following the *.Tests.ps1 naming convention.
Required Information
Before generating, ask for:
- What are we testing? — a PowerShell function, a deployed Azure resource, or a pipeline script?
- Unit or integration? — unit mocks Az cmdlets; integration tests run against real Azure
- Function/script name — used for
Describeblock naming and file naming - What should it validate? — list success cases, failure/edge cases
Unit Test Template
# tests/unit/{FunctionName}.Tests.ps1
#Requires -Modules @{ ModuleName = 'Pester'; ModuleVersion = '5.0' }
BeforeAll {
# Import the function under test via dot-sourcing
. $PSScriptRoot/../../modules/{ModuleName}/{FunctionName}.ps1
# Stub out Az cmdlets — never hit real Azure in unit tests
Mock New-AzResourceGroupDeployment {
[PSCustomObject]@{
DeploymentName = 'mock-deployment'
ProvisioningState = 'Succeeded'
Outputs = @{}
}
}
}
Describe '{FunctionName}' {
Context 'Given valid input' {
It 'calls the Az cmdlet once with correct parameters' {
{FunctionName} -ParameterA 'value-a' -ParameterB 'value-b'
Should -Invoke New-AzResourceGroupDeployment -Times 1 -ParameterFilter {
$ResourceGroupName -eq 'expected-rg'
}
}
It 'returns a succeeded result' {
$result = {FunctionName} -ParameterA 'value-a' -ParameterB 'value-b'
$result.ProvisioningState | Should -Be 'Succeeded'
}
}
Context 'Given invalid input' {
It 'throws when required parameter is missing' {
{ {FunctionName} -ParameterB 'value-b' } | Should -Throw
}
It 'throws when environment is invalid' {
{ {FunctionName} -ParameterA 'invalid' } | Should -Throw -ExpectedMessage '*must be one of*'
}
}
}
Integration Test Template
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.
- today First seen · 136 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 555aee5623dc
new-pester-test is a command published in the GitHub repository srnichols/plan-forge (5 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 1,105 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-08.
Other commands, from other repositories
coding-flow
Light coding workflow: features, fixes, refactors, unit tests, etc.; scales small to large.
modernization-flow-testing
Phase 3 Testing (optional) of modernization-flow.
ui-aqa-flow-code-analysis
Phase 3 Code Analysis of ui-aqa-flow.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.