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/holasoymalva/AI-Unit-Test-BuilderWrote 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/holasoymalva/ai-unit-test-builder/refactor-test)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/holasoymalva/ai-unit-test-builder/refactor-test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/holasoymalva/ai-unit-test-builder/refactor-test/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/holasoymalva/ai-unit-test-builder/refactor-test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/holasoymalva/ai-unit-test-builder/refactor-test.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 | $0.00012 | $0.02093 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00837 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00419 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00209 |
Grade A, and why
refactor-test 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 334 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Rule: Test Refactoring and Optimization
Goal
To guide an AI assistant in reviewing and improving generated unit tests by optimizing structure, enhancing coverage, removing redundancy, and following testing best practices.
Prerequisites
- Generated unit test file (from
generate-unit-test.mdc) - Original source code file
- Function analysis document (optional but helpful)
Process
- Analyze Current Tests: Review the existing test file for quality and coverage
- Identify Improvements: Find areas for optimization, missing coverage, or redundancy
- Refactor Structure: Optimize test organization and readability
- Enhance Coverage: Add missing test scenarios
- Optimize Performance: Improve test efficiency and reliability
- Update Documentation: Add or improve test comments and descriptions
Analysis Checklist
Test Structure Review
- Are tests logically grouped and organized?
- Are test names descriptive and follow conventions?
- Is there proper setup and teardown?
- Are tests independent of each other?
Coverage Assessment
- Are all code paths tested?
- Are edge cases adequately covered?
- Are error scenarios tested?
- Are async operations properly tested?
Code Quality
- Are there duplicate test patterns that can be abstracted?
- Are mocks properly configured and reset?
- Are test utilities reusable?
- Is the code readable and maintainable?
Performance & Reliability
- Are tests fast and efficient?
- Are there any flaky or unreliable tests?
- Are async operations properly awaited?
- Are timeouts appropriately set?
Refactoring Strategies
1. Test Organization
Before (Poor Organization)
describe('UserService', () => {
it('should create user', () => { /* test */ });
it('should handle invalid email in create', () => { /* test */ });
it('should delete user', () => { /* test */ });
it('should handle invalid id in delete', () => { /* test */ });
});
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 · 334 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A d12d2fb8ea64
refactor-test is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository holasoymalva/AI-Unit-Test-Builder (7 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 2,093 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-31.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
jest
Jest: describe/it, matchers, mocking, async testing.
vitest
Vitest: unit testing, mocking, coverage, snapshot testing.
pytest
You are an expert in pytest testing. Follow these rules.
propose-test-cases
Propose comprehensive test cases for PR changes.
07-testing
Cursor rule "07-testing" from orbitalsonic/AndroidPilot, covering testing, architecture, prefer, unit testing and scope.
jest-unit-testing-cursorrules-prompt-file
Cursor rules for Jest development with unit testing.