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/ccashwell/evm-cortexWrote 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/rules/ccashwell/evm-cortex/testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/ccashwell/evm-cortex/testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ccashwell/evm-cortex/testing/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/rules/ccashwell/evm-cortex/testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ccashwell/evm-cortex/testing.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 | $0.00459 | $0.00459 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00184 | $0.00184 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00092 | $0.00092 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00046 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
testing 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Foundry Testing Standards
TDD Workflow
- Write test first (RED) -- test must fail
- Write minimal implementation (GREEN) -- test must pass
- Refactor and optimize (IMPROVE)
- Run
forge snapshotto baseline gas - Target 90%+ coverage on critical paths
Test File Structure
test/
unit/ # Unit tests per contract
integration/ # Cross-contract interaction tests
invariant/ # Stateful invariant tests
fork/ # Fork tests against live protocols
poc/ # Proof-of-concept exploit tests
Naming Conventions
- Unit tests:
test_FunctionName_Condition_ExpectedResult - Revert tests:
test_RevertWhen_Condition - Fuzz tests:
testFuzz_FunctionName_PropertyDescription - Invariant tests:
invariant_PropertyDescription - Fork tests:
testFork_ScenarioDescription
Test Quality Rules
- Every public/external function must have at least one test
- Test happy path AND failure cases
- Test edge cases: 0, 1, type(uint256).max, empty arrays
- Fuzz test ALL math operations (min 10,000 runs)
- Fork-test ALL external protocol integrations
- First depositor / last withdrawer scenarios for vaults
- Invariant tests for core protocol properties
Cheatcode Usage
vm.prank(addr)for single-call impersonationvm.startPrank(addr)/vm.stopPrank()for multi-calldeal(token, addr, amount)for token balancesvm.warp(ts)andvm.roll(bn)for time/blockvm.expectRevert(Error.selector)for revert testsvm.expectEmit()for event verificationvm.assume()/vm.bound()for fuzz input constraintsmakeAddr("name")for labeled test addresses
CI Integration
forge test --gas-report # All tests + gas
forge snapshot --check # Gas regression check
forge coverage # Coverage report
slither . # Static analysis
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 53 lines · 459 tokens per session scan A 263a60551109
testing is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository ccashwell/evm-cortex (131 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 459 tokens to every session, about $0.0018 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-30.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
mcpnuke-tests
Test conventions for mcpnuke — enforces TDD workflow.
debug-issue
When the user reports a bug, an error, or unexpected behavior. Enforces four structured phases — reproduction, failing test, root cause isolation, fix and verify — to stop guess-and-check loops.
zama-protocol-zama-solidity--setups-foundry
Detailed reference for foundry (zama-solidity skill).
common-testing
Testing requirements: 80% coverage, TDD workflow.
testing_rules
A testing guide covering TDD, where tests are written before code, and BDD, where expected behavior is described in Given-When-Then form.
tdd
Test-driven development — red-green-refactor cycle.