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.
npx agentmods add skills/6bnbn/flowpilot/test-driven-developmentnpx skills add 6BNBN/FlowPilot --skill test-driven-developmentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/6BNBN/FlowPilotWhat 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 | $0.00017 | $0.02415 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.01208 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00483 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00242 |
Grade A, and why
test-driven-development 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 2d 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.
This is a copy
97% identical to test-driven-development — 12 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 372 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test-Driven Development (TDD)
Overview
Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.
Core principle: If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.
Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.
When to Use
Always:
- New features
- Bug fixes
- Refactoring
- Behavior changes
Exceptions (ask your human partner):
- Throwaway prototypes
- Generated code
- Configuration files
Thinking "skip TDD just this once"? Stop. That's rationalization.
The Iron Law
NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.
No exceptions:
- Don't keep it as "reference"
- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
- Don't look at it
- Delete means delete
Implement fresh from tests. Period.
Red-Green-Refactor
digraph tdd_cycle {
rankdir=LR;
red [label="RED\nWrite failing test", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ffcccc"];
verify_red [label="Verify fails\ncorrectly", shape=diamond];
green [label="GREEN\nMinimal code", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccffcc"];
verify_green [label="Verify passes\nAll green", shape=diamond];
refactor [label="REFACTOR\nClean up", shape=box, style=filled, fillcolor="#ccccff"];
next [label="Next", shape=ellipse];
red -> verify_red;
verify_red -> green [label="yes"];
verify_red -> red [label="wrong\nfailure"];
green -> verify_green;
verify_green -> refactor [label="yes"];
verify_green -> green [label="no"];
refactor -> verify_green [label="stay\ngreen"];
verify_green -> next;
next -> red;
}
RED - Write Failing Test
Write one minimal test showing what should happen.
const result = await retryOperation(operation);
expect(result).toBe('success'); expect(attempts).toBe(3); });
Clear name, tests real behavior, one thing
</Good>
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 372 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 8929f0b55460
test-driven-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository 6BNBN/FlowPilot (133 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 2,415 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to test-driven-development, differing in 12 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
coding-agents-farm
To orchestrate parallel coding-agent farms (Claude, Codex, Copilot, Gemini, etc.) on isolated git worktrees.
agent-orchestration-multi-agent-optimize-v2
Multi-Agent Optimization Toolkit workflow skill. Use this skill when the user needs Optimize multi-agent systems with coordinated profiling, workload distribution, and cost-aware orchestration. Use when improving agent performance, throughput, or reliability and the operator should preserve the upstream workflow…
nobrainer-ultra
Use when the owner says nb-ultra, nb-flow, nb-workflow, ultracode, or asks to set up, upgrade, or reconcile a project's agent workflow; or wants one non-trivial task taken from brief requirements through a complete skill-routed plan, guarded autonomous execution, useful multi-session work and final evidence audit.
nobrainer-dispatcher
Use when the owner says nb-dispatcher or nobrainer-dispatcher, or when an approved execution map has multiple queued work units that require ready-set selection, dependency-aware ordering, bounded parallel batches, retry scheduling, or routing audited results to the next queued unit; do not use for one coherent task…
nobrainer-autoimprove
Use when the owner says nb-autoimprove, deep-autoresearch, code-autoresearch, nobrainer-capture-lesson, or nobrainer-continuous-improvement; asks to improve a skill or prompt; or wants a measurable bounded baseline-variant-evaluation loop instead of one subjective rewrite.
nobrainer-writing
Use when the owner says nb-write, nobrainer-writing, nobrainer-style, or nobrainer-human-like, or asks to draft, rewrite, compress, humanize, edit, or review user-facing prose such as a message, comment, document, README, report, summary, email, post, or release note; maximize useful information per word without…