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/nphausg/ai-agent-skillsWrote 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/nphausg/ai-agent-skills/android_integration_testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/nphausg/ai-agent-skills/android_integration_testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/nphausg/ai-agent-skills/android_integration_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/nphausg/ai-agent-skills/android_integration_testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/nphausg/ai-agent-skills/android_integration_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 | $0.00009 | $0.00142 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00057 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00028 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00014 |
Grade A, and why
android_integration_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
- Integration tests should verify interactions between multiple layers (e.g., ViewModel + Repository + Data Source).
- Use Hilt Test Components or DI overrides to inject fake or in-memory dependencies.
- Avoid hitting real external services; use mocked network responses or test databases.
- Write integration tests to cover critical user flows end-to-end.
- Keep tests stable and repeatable; clean up any test data after execution.
- Use JUnit Rules or TestContainers where applicable for environment setup/teardown.
- Separate integration tests from unit tests and run them less frequently (e.g., nightly builds).
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 · 12 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A 86361216c5f1
android_integration_testing is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository nphausg/ai-agent-skills (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 142 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
testing
Vitest toolchain and testing discipline - two runtimes, no watch for agents, authoring gate, junk patterns.
swift-testing-playbook
Comprehensive guide for migrating from XCTest to Swift Testing with best practices from WWDC 2024.
safari-automation
Patterns and best practices for automating Safari browser interactions for web UI automation and testing.
chaos
Failure injection mode — stress test implementations by simulating failures and hostile conditions.
qa
QA cycle mode — test, diagnose, fix, repeat until passing or max cycles reached.
tdd
Test-driven development — red-green-refactor cycle.