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/yezannnnn/agentgroup/testing_reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yezannnnn/agentGroupWrote 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/yezannnnn/agentgroup/testing_review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/yezannnnn/agentgroup/testing_review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/yezannnnn/agentgroup/testing_review.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01210 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00605 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00242 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00121 |
Grade A, and why
testing_review 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 4d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to testing_review — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 192 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Testing Review - Execute top to bottom
Analyzes test implementation against the project's testing strategy to ensure tests remain balanced, purposeful, and aligned with development goals.
Prerequisites Check
FIRST, check if a testing strategy document exists:
- CHECK for
.simone/01_PROJECT_DOCS/TESTING_STRATEGY.md - If NOT found, inform the user: "No testing strategy document found. Would you like me to help create one, or proceed with a general test quality review?"
- If user wants to proceed without strategy, adapt the review to focus on general test quality principles
Create a TODO with EXACTLY these 7 Items
- Load testing strategy document (or define review criteria)
- Analyze test implementation structure
- Evaluate test-to-code alignment
- Identify misaligned or unnecessary tests
- Assess critical functionality coverage
- Generate modification recommendations
- Create alignment report
Follow step by step and adhere closely to the following instructions for each step.
DETAILS on every TODO item
1. Load testing strategy document (or define review criteria)
Option A - Strategy document exists:
- LOAD
.simone/01_PROJECT_DOCS/TESTING_STRATEGY.md - EXTRACT key principles and priorities
- IDENTIFY what should and shouldn't be tested
- NOTE coverage expectations and quality gates
- UNDERSTAND the testing philosophy
Option B - No strategy document: Use general best practices as review criteria:
- Tests should focus on behavior, not implementation
- Critical paths must have coverage
- Tests should be maintainable and clear
- Avoid over-testing simple getters/setters
- Balance between coverage and maintenance burden
DOCUMENT which approach is being used for this review.
2. Analyze test implementation structure
EXAMINE the current test codebase:
- USE test.md command to run tests
- EXPLORE test directory structure and organization
- IDENTIFY test categories and their purposes
- CHECK test naming conventions and patterns
- NOTE any test infrastructure or utilities
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 192 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 97cbed376a09
testing_review is a command published in the GitHub repository yezannnnn/agentGroup (149 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,210 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to testing_review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
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.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.