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 skills add baleen37/bstack --skill e2e-scenario-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/baleen37/bstackWrote 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/skills/baleen37/bstack/e2e-scenario-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/baleen37/bstack/e2e-scenario-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/baleen37/bstack/e2e-scenario-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/skills/baleen37/bstack/e2e-scenario-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/baleen37/bstack/e2e-scenario-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 | $0.00105 | $0.01763 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00042 | $0.00705 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00353 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00176 |
Grade A, and why
e2e-scenario-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 148 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
End-to-end scenario testing
Verify that a running application does what it claims, by driving its real interface the way a user would. The unit of work is a scenario card: a short markdown test written for an agent to execute — not a Playwright/expect script. Cards are high-level enough that a small UI shuffle doesn't invalidate them, but precise enough that two agents running the same card reach the same verdict.
A green unit test proves the wiring in isolation. A scenario proves the wiring as assembled and rendered. They catch different bugs — write the card even when the unit tests pass.
Which skill to use
/verify— does one change behave as intended (default path)/e2e-scenario-testing— drive a running app through its real interface, one scenario
When to use this
- A feature touches a user-facing surface (button, palette command, status indicator, keybinding, rendered message) and you want proof it works live.
- The user asks to "test it end to end" / "prove the UI works" / "run a scenario."
- You changed a layer (projection, capability gate, renderer) whose effect is only observable in the assembled UI.
Don't use it for logic with no UI surface (unit-test that), or when a production gate makes the live path unreachable (see Over-specification below).
The card format
One card = one .md file. Keep these sections; collapse any to one line when
the scenario is simple. Don't pad.
# <area>-<behavior>: one-line title
**What this covers**: the feature + the specific commits/IDs it exercises.
If something else breaks this, it should be caught here.
## Pre-state
What must be true before starting: a freshly built instance running, auth/creds
in place, a clean workdir. Give the exact commands to reach it.
## Steps
Numbered actions described by **intent**, each with the concrete command or
tool call and a real UI label (prefer labels the user sees over brittle
selectors like `#nav > li:nth-child(3)`).
## Expected
For each step, what you should observe — and the **falsification condition**:
"if you see X instead, the test fails." Silence is not success.
## Cleanup
Idempotent teardown so reruns are hermetic. Never touch state you didn't create.
## Sharp edges
Footguns, timing/ordering caveats, nondeterminism noted while recording.
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 Changed · -1 lines 5b47cdced132
- 1mo ago First seen · 149 lines · 105 tokens per session scan A 146e7da16895
e2e-scenario-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository baleen37/bstack (4 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 105 tokens to every session and 1,763 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 skills, from other repositories
eval-dataset-design
A guide to creating reliable test sets for AI agents. Each evaluation task includes the request, the simulated user's behaviour, a reset starting state, and a success check that can be independently verified.
verify-omnigent
Drive Omnigent the way a user does and prove a behavior with recorded evidence, using an isolated server, runner, and mock model plus a feature map of every user entry point. Load before reproducing a user-facing bug, before claiming a fix works, or when reviewing whether a change covered every surface (session vs.…
test-master
Generates test files, creates mocking strategies, analyzes code coverage, designs test architectures, and produces test plans and defect reports across functional, performance, and security testing disciplines. Use when writing unit tests, integration tests, or E2E tests; creating test strategies or automation…
dogfood
Systematically explore and test a mobile app on iOS/Android with agent-device to find bugs, UX issues, and other problems. Use when asked to dogfood, QA, exploratory test, find issues, bug hunt, or test this app on mobile.
cua-driver
Use Cua Driver for desktop or browser tasks that are awkward or unavailable through Bash/APIs, or when the user explicitly wants GUI interaction: app testing, visual bug reproduction, form filling, calendar entry, screenshots, and demo recording. Also covers Cua setup; not OpenAI Codex Computer Use or web research.
critique
Adversarial design critique of the current work — render it, look at it, and argue for rejection. Run after the gates are green, never instead of them.