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/vibestackdev/vibe-stackWrote 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/vibestackdev/vibe-stack/testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/vibestackdev/vibe-stack/testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/vibestackdev/vibe-stack/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/vibestackdev/vibe-stack/testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/vibestackdev/vibe-stack/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 | $0.00000 | $0.00226 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00090 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00045 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00023 |
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
Testing Strategy
Use Vitest for unit tests, Playwright for E2E testing.
What to test (prioritized):
- Server Actions (they're just functions — easy to test)
- API route handlers
- Auth flows (most critical)
- Complex business logic and utility functions
What NOT to bother testing with unit tests:
- Simple React leaf components (visual testing is better)
- Styling logic and Tailwind classes
- Component boilerplate
Simple Server Action test example:
import { createTodo } from '@/app/actions'
import { expect, test, describe } from 'vitest'
describe('createTodo Server Action', () => {
test('creates todo for authenticated user', async () => {
const formData = new FormData()
formData.set('title', 'Test todo')
const result = await createTodo(formData)
expect(result.success).toBe(true)
})
})
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 · 36 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 31df67fbf9c8
testing is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository vibestackdev/vibe-stack (8 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 226 tokens. 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
Testing Best Practices and Guidelines.
upgrade-tests
// ✅ CORRECT: Upgrade package pattern await using ctx = testReactResource(appRouter, { server: { // server configuration }, client(opts) { return { links: [ httpLink({ url: opts.httpUrl, // client configuration }), ], }; }, }).
react-query-tests
// ✅ CORRECT: Legacy React Query pattern const ctx = konn() .beforeEach(() => createAppRouter()) .afterEach((ctx) => ctx?.close?.()) .done().
tanstack-react-query-tests
// ✅ CORRECT: Use await using for automatic cleanup await using ctx = testReactResource(appRouter, { server: { // server configuration }, client(opts) { return { links: [ httpLink({ url: opts.httpUrl, // client configuration }), ], }; }, }).
test-patterns
// ✅ CORRECT: Use await using for automatic cleanup await using ctx = testServerAndClientResource(router, { client(opts) { return { links: [ httpLink({ url: opts.httpUrl, fetch: mockFetch, }), ], }; }, }).
react-functional-components-preference
A React style rule that prefers function components with Hooks such as useState and useEffect over class components. Hooks are React functions for managing state and other component behavior.