Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TheBeardedBearSAS/claude-craftnpx agentmods add commands/thebeardedbearsas/claude-craft/tddWrote 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/thebeardedbearsas/claude-craft/tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/thebeardedbearsas/claude-craft/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/thebeardedbearsas/claude-craft/tdd.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00009 | $0.02243 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.01122 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00449 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00224 |
Grade A, and why
tdd 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 3d 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 — 389 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Correction de Bug en Mode TDD/BDD
Tu es un développeur senior expert en TDD (Test-Driven Development) et BDD (Behavior-Driven Development). Tu dois corriger un bug en suivant strictement la méthodologie TDD/BDD : d'abord écrire un test qui échoue reproduisant le bug, puis corriger le code pour faire passer le test.
Arguments
$ARGUMENTS
Arguments :
- Description du bug ou lien vers le ticket
- (Optionnel) Fichier ou module concerné
Exemple : /qa:tdd "L'utilisateur ne peut pas se déconnecter" ou /qa:tdd #123
MISSION
Philosophie TDD/BDD
RED → GREEN → REFACTOR
1. RED : Écrire un test qui échoue (reproduit le bug)
2. GREEN : Écrire le minimum de code pour faire passer le test
3. REFACTOR : Améliorer le code sans casser les tests
Étape 1 : Comprendre le Bug
Collecter les informations
- Description précise du comportement actuel
- Comportement attendu
- Étapes de reproduction
- Environnement concerné
- Logs/stack traces disponibles
Questions à se poser
- Quel est le comportement actuel ?
- Quel devrait être le comportement correct ?
- Quand le bug a-t-il été introduit ? (git bisect si nécessaire)
- Quels sont les cas limites ?
- Y a-t-il des tests existants qui auraient dû catcher ce bug ?
Étape 2 : RED - Écrire le Test qui Échoue
Format BDD (Gherkin-style)
Feature: [Fonctionnalité concernée]
En tant que [type d'utilisateur]
Je veux [action]
Afin de [bénéfice]
Scenario: [Description du cas de bug]
Given [contexte/état initial]
When [action qui déclenche le bug]
Then [comportement attendu qui ne se produit pas actuellement]
Test Unitaire
# Python - pytest
class TestBugFix:
"""
Bug: [Description courte]
Ticket: #XXX
Comportement actuel: [ce qui se passe]
Comportement attendu: [ce qui devrait se passer]
"""
def test_should_[expected_behavior]_when_[condition](self):
# Arrange - Préparer le contexte
# ...
# Act - Exécuter l'action qui cause le bug
# ...
# Assert - Vérifier le comportement attendu
# Ce test DOIT échouer avant le fix
assert result == expected_value
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 389 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A c8f175bf3a18
tdd is a command published in the GitHub repository TheBeardedBearSAS/claude-craft (105 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 2,243 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
hatch3r-bug-pipeline
Run a known-cause bug fix through a 3-phase test-first pipeline -- reproduce + root-cause, regression-test + fix together, then root-cause-depth review -- with full sub-agent delegation.
bug
Reproduce then TDD-fix a ready-for-agent bug ticket in this checkout. Web bugs get a browser repro first.
orch-fix-defect
Orchestrate fixing a bug — reproduce it as a failing regression test, fix to green, review, gated commit. Wrapper for the orch-fix-defect skill.
tdd-bug
Fix a bug with regression test first.
implement
E2E-first Test driven development — unit tests written last.
CLAUDE
When debugging TUI commands like wt switch (interactive picker), use the tmux-cli skill (preferred) or MCP's node-terminal tools to test interactively.