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/fledgeling-co/fledgeling-pluginsWrote 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/plugins/fledgeling-co/fledgeling-plugins/test-campaign)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/plugins/fledgeling-co/fledgeling-plugins/test-campaign"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/plugins/fledgeling-co/fledgeling-plugins/test-campaign/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/plugins/fledgeling-co/fledgeling-plugins/test-campaign"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/plugins/fledgeling-co/fledgeling-plugins/test-campaign.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>Grade A, and why
test-campaign 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 13d 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 — 10 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
{
"name": "test-campaign",
"version": "0.20.1",
"description": "Run a complete UI test campaign against an application and leave behind a living evidence page \u2014 coverage, requirements, user-flow storyboards, screenshots, component atlas and defects in one browsable surface where every row has a stable id somebody can point at. Reads the project first \u2014 Overview, PRD, feature specs, design md and the latest mock UIs \u2014 so the campaign knows what the product *claims* to do before it looks at what it renders, then enumerates the correctness space (surface \u00d7 state \u00d7 viewport \u00d7 theme \u00d7 role \u00d7 locale \u00d7 data shape \u00d7 modality \u00d7 execution plane \u00d7 oracle), samples it deliberately and says so, writes and runs the suite in the project's own harness, sweeps for what no requirement named, and measures the build against its design of record on structure, style, vocabulary and geometry rather than on pixels. Every case carries which rung of oracle it stands on, so a critical flow proved only by \"the element exists\" fails the gate instead of passing quietly; a case claiming pixels must name a real capture and the channel it came from; a lane claiming the app was running and drawn must name the artifact and what witnessed it attaching, because a suite once reported 100% checked over two desktop apps that had never drawn a window; a published screenshot must name what the capture channel was pointed at, because a wall of 20 captures once showed three unrelated documents while every gate passed and only the filename bound a picture to its surface; a surface's controls and a navigation shell's destinations are counted the way surfaces are, because a campaign once reported 32 of 32 cases passing and armed over an application whose six menu items opened one screen and whose every button ran an empty closure, and an effect is never the product's own report that it acted; a check the instrument could not perform is inconclusWhat it installs
The manifest is a name and a version. 2 skills travel with it, and installing the plugin installs all of them — 579 tokens a session between them. Each is measured on its own page, and each can be installed alone.
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.
- 13d ago Changed a75f5ab0ed10
- 28d ago Changed b891df82eb06
- 2mo ago Changed 5d5fd7225a13
- 2mo ago Changed 76005de3001d
- 2mo ago Changed 4f761bae67af
- 2mo ago First seen · 10 lines scan A 950ac0d66f0e
test-campaign is a plugin published in the GitHub repository fledgeling-co/fledgeling-plugins (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. Its token cost is not measured: this kind of file is read by the harness, not the model. 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 2026-09-04.
test-campaign compared with plugins from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| test-campaignfledgeling-co/fledgeling-plugins | Plugin | 2 | today | MIT | A | — | Claude Code |
| e2eentireio/cli | Plugin | 5.3k | today | MIT | A | — | Claude Code |
| meticulousalwaysmeticulous/skills | Plugin | 10 | 11d ago | ISC | A | — | Claude Code |
| playwright-e2epnakhat/qa-ai-repo | Plugin | 2 | 1mo ago | MIT | A | — | Claude Code |
| sniffAboudjem/sniff | Plugin | 4 | 2mo ago | Apache-2.0 | A | — | Claude Code |
| headlesspaddo/claude-tools | Plugin | 35 | 21d ago | none | A | — | Claude Code |
| accessibility-test-scannerjeremylongshore/plugins-nixtla | Plugin | 11 | 26d ago | none | A | — | Claude Code |