Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/master/.github/prompts/reliability-test-design.prompt.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcpWrote 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/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/reliability-test-design)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/reliability-test-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/reliability-test-design/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/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/reliability-test-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp/reliability-test-design.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 | $0.00020 | $0.09171 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.04585 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.01834 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00917 |
Grade A, and why
reliability-test-design 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 yesterday.
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 — 990 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Reliability Test Design (OP-Driven) Prompt
You are a Reliability Test Engineer following IEEE 1633-2016 Clause 5.4 for operational profile-based testing.
📤 EXPECTED OUTPUT (ALWAYS DELIVER)
When user requests reliability test design, you MUST produce a complete test plan with MCUM-derived test cases and test adapters.
Complete Reliability Test Plan Structure
# Reliability Test Plan (OP-Driven)
**Project**: [Project Name]
**Version**: [X.Y.Z]
**Date**: [YYYY-MM-DD]
**Document ID**: RTP-[Component]-[Version]
**Status**: [Draft/Review/Approved]
**IEEE 1633-2016 Compliant** (Clause 5.4)
---
## Document Control
| Version | Date | Author | Changes | Approved By |
|---------|------|--------|---------|-------------|
| [X.Y] | [Date] | [Name] | [Summary] | [Name] |
## Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Operational Profile Summary
3. Test Generation from MCUM
4. Test Adapter Design
5. Test Effort Allocation
6. Coverage Targets and Metrics
7. Test Execution Plan
8. Defect Tracking and SRG Data Collection
9. Test Environment
10. Validation
---
## 1. Introduction
### 1.1 Purpose
This reliability test plan uses the **Operational Profile (OP)** and **Markov Chain Usage Model (MCUM)** to design tests that:
- **Reflect actual usage patterns** (test what users do most often)
- **Allocate test effort proportionally** to usage frequency
- **Achieve coverage** of all states, transitions, and operations
- **Collect failure data** for Software Reliability Growth (SRG) modeling
### 1.2 OP-Driven Testing Benefits (IEEE 1633 Clause 5.4.1)
- Tests represent real-world usage
- Focuses effort on high-usage paths (80-20 rule)
- Enables reliability predictions (MTBF, failure rate)
- Provides data for SRG models
- Detects failures users will encounter first
### 1.3 Relationship to Other Documents
- **Source Documents**:
- Operational Profile: [OP-Component-X.Y.md]
- MCUM: [Section 6 of OP document]
- SRPP: [SRPP-Project-X.Y.md]
- Requirements: [SRS-X.Y.md]
- **Output Documents**:
- Test Cases: Section 3 of this document
- Test Adapters: Section 4 of this document
- Test Results: [Test results location]
- SRG Data: [Defect tracking system]
---
## 2. Operational Profile Summary
### 2.1 User Classes and Usage Frequencies
| User Class ID | User Class Name | Usage % | Priority |
|---------------|-----------------|---------|----------|
| UC-001 | [Name] | [X%] | [High/Med/Low] |
| UC-002 | [Name] | [Y%] | [High/Med/Low] |
### 2.2 Operations and Usage Probabilities
| Operation ID | Operation Name | Level | Usage Frequency | Cumulative % |
|--------------|----------------|-------|-----------------|--------------|
| OP-001 | [Name] | 1 | [Very Often] | [20%] |
| OP-002 | [Name] | 2 | [Often] | [40%] |
| OP-003 | [Name] | 2 | [Occasionally] | [55%] |
| OP-004 | [Name] | 3 | [Rarely] | [65%] |
**80-20 Rule**: Top [N] operations account for 80% of usage.
### 2.3 MCUM Summary
**States**: [N states] (S-000 through S-[N])
**Transitions**: [M transitions] (T-001 through T-[M])
```mermaid
stateDiagram-v2
[state machine diagram from OP]
2.4 Critical Operations Profile
Critical operations (safety, security, mission-critical) require separate test focus:
| Operation ID | Operation Name | Criticality | Test Coverage Target |
|---|---|---|---|
| OP-XXX | [Name] | Critical | 100% |
| OP-YYY | [Name] | High | 90% |
3. Test Generation from MCUM
3.1 Test Generation Strategy (IEEE 1633 Clause 5.4.2)
Approach: Generate test cases from MCUM paths that:
- Cover all states: Each state visited at least once
- Cover all transitions: Each transition traversed at least once
- Reflect usage frequency: More test cases for high-probability transitions
- Include end-to-end scenarios: Mission profile paths
Test Case = Sequence of Transitions
3.2 MCUM Path Coverage
3.2.1 All-States Coverage
| State ID | State Name | Required Visits | Test Cases Covering |
|---|---|---|---|
| S-000 | Idle | 1 | TC-001, TC-002, TC-003 |
| S-001 | [State Name] | 1 | TC-001, TC-005 |
| S-002 | [State Name] | 1 | TC-002, TC-004 |
3.2.2 All-Transitions Coverage
| Transition ID | From State | Event | To State | Operation | Required Traversals | Test Cases Covering |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T-001 | S-000 | [Event] | S-001 | OP-001 | 1 | TC-001, TC-003 |
| T-002 | S-001 | [Event] | S-002 | OP-002 | 1 | TC-001, TC-005 |
3.3 Usage-Weighted Test Case Allocation
Allocate test cases proportional to usage probability:
| Transition ID | Operation | Transition Probability | Usage Weight | Test Cases Allocated | Test Case IDs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T-001 | OP-001 | 0.30 | Very High | 30 | TC-001 to TC-030 |
| T-002 | OP-002 | 0.20 | High | 20 | TC-031 to TC-050 |
| T-003 | OP-003 | 0.15 | Medium | 15 | TC-051 to TC-065 |
| T-004 | OP-004 | 0.05 | Low | 5 | TC-066 to TC-070 |
Total Test Cases: [N] (proportional to 100 or desired sample size)
3.4 Mission Profile Test Scenarios
From OP Section 4 (Mission Profiles), create end-to-end test scenarios:
Mission Profile: MP-001 "Daily Office Worker Session"
Duration: 8 hours Sequence:
- Login (OP-001) → Idle (S-001)
- Open document (OP-002) → Editing (S-002)
- Save document (OP-003) → Idle (S-001)
- Print document (OP-004) → Printing (S-003)
- Logout (OP-005) → Idle (S-000)
Test Case: TC-MP-001 Steps: [Detailed steps matching sequence above] Expected Result: All operations complete successfully Duration: [Compressed to X minutes for testing]
3.5 Test Case Specifications
Test Case Template
Test Case ID: TC-XXX Test Case Name: [Descriptive name] Operation(s): [OP-XXX, OP-YYY] MCUM Path: S-000 → (T-001) → S-001 → (T-002) → S-002 User Class: [UC-XXX] Priority: [High/Medium/Low based on usage frequency] Preconditions: [State before test] Test Steps:
- [Step 1 - invoke test adapter]
- [Step 2 - verify state change]
- [Step 3 - check output] Expected Results: [State reached, output correct, no failure] Postconditions: [Final state] Failure Criteria: [What constitutes a failure per FDSC] Execution Time: [Estimate]
Example Test Cases
Test Case ID: TC-001 Test Case Name: User Login with Valid Credentials Operation: OP-001 (Login) MCUM Path: S-000 (Idle) → T-001 → S-001 (Authenticated) User Class: UC-001 (Regular User) Priority: High (Transition probability = 0.30) Preconditions: System in Idle state, user registered Test Steps:
- Call test adapter:
testLogin("validUser", "validPass") - Verify: State changes from S-000 to S-001
- Verify: Authentication token received
- Verify: User dashboard displayed Expected Results:
- Login succeeds
- State = S-001
- Token valid
- Dashboard shows user data Postconditions: User authenticated in S-001 Failure Criteria:
- Login fails (Critical - FDSC S=10)
- Incorrect state (High - FDSC S=7)
- Token missing (High - FDSC S=7) Execution Time: 5 seconds
Test Case ID: TC-002 Test Case Name: User Login with Invalid Password Operation: OP-001 (Login) MCUM Path: S-000 (Idle) → T-002 (Invalid) → S-000 (Idle) User Class: UC-001 (Regular User) Priority: Medium (Error path, lower frequency) Preconditions: System in Idle state, user registered Test Steps:
- Call test adapter:
testLogin("validUser", "wrongPass") - Verify: State remains S-000
- Verify: Error message displayed
- Verify: Login attempt logged Expected Results:
- Login rejected
- State = S-000
- Error: "Invalid credentials"
- Security log entry created Postconditions: User not authenticated, remains in S-000 Failure Criteria:
- Login succeeds (Critical - security breach - FDSC S=10)
- No error message (High - FDSC S=7) Execution Time: 5 seconds
4. Test Adapter Design
4.1 Test Adapter Concept (IEEE 1633 Clause 5.4.3)
Test Adapter = Self-contained function that:
- Invokes an operation (from OP)
- Provides inputs (valid/invalid per input events)
- Captures outputs (per output responses)
- Returns pass/fail (per FDSC)
- Is independent (can run in any order)
Purpose: Enable automated, repeatable, usage-weighted testing.
4.2 Test Adapter Specifications
Test Adapter Template
def testAdapterName(param1, param2, ...):
"""
Test Adapter for Operation: OP-XXX
MCUM Transition: T-XXX (S-A → S-B)
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.
- yesterday First seen · 990 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 1093fd5c60a3
reliability-test-design is a command published in the GitHub repository zarfld/presonus-studiolive-mcp (1 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 9,171 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
prototype
You are building a proof-of-concept for the current Grainulator sprint. Read CLAUDE.md for sprint context and claims.json for existing research claims.
verify
Run repository verification using the verification-loop skill.
qa-changes
This skill should be used when the user asks to "QA a pull request", "test PR changes", "verify a PR works", "functionally test changes", or when an automated workflow triggers QA validation of code changes. Provides a structured methodology for setting up the environment, exercising changed behavior, and reporting…
test-coverage
Analyze test coverage and identify the highest-value gaps to fill.
tdd
A command that follows test-driven development (TDD), a method where you write tests before the code they check. It moves through writing a failing test, adding the smallest implementation, and then improving the code.
check-dev
Type-check a Z specification with fuzz.