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 bl1nk-bot/bl1nk-agents-manager --skill rust-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bl1nk-bot/bl1nk-agents-managerWrote 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/bl1nk-bot/bl1nk-agents-manager/rust-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bl1nk-bot/bl1nk-agents-manager/rust-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bl1nk-bot/bl1nk-agents-manager/rust-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/bl1nk-bot/bl1nk-agents-manager/rust-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bl1nk-bot/bl1nk-agents-manager/rust-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 | $0.00031 | $0.03092 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01546 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00618 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00309 |
Grade A, and why
rust-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 9d 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 — 471 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Rust Testing Patterns
Comprehensive Rust testing patterns for writing reliable, maintainable tests following TDD methodology.
When to Use
- Writing new Rust functions, methods, or traits
- Adding test coverage to existing code
- Creating benchmarks for performance-critical code
- Implementing property-based tests for input validation
- Following TDD workflow in Rust projects
How It Works
- Identify target code — Find the function, trait, or module to test
- Write a test — Use
#[test]in a#[cfg(test)]module, rstest for parameterized tests, or proptest for property-based tests - Mock dependencies — Use mockall to isolate the unit under test
- Run tests (RED) — Verify the test fails with the expected error
- Implement (GREEN) — Write minimal code to pass
- Refactor — Improve while keeping tests green
- Check coverage — Use cargo-llvm-cov, target 80%+
TDD Workflow for Rust
The RED-GREEN-REFACTOR Cycle
RED → Write a failing test first
GREEN → Write minimal code to pass the test
REFACTOR → Improve code while keeping tests green
REPEAT → Continue with next requirement
Step-by-Step TDD in Rust
// RED: Write test first, use todo!() as placeholder
pub fn add(a: i32, b: i32) -> i32 { todo!() }
#[cfg(test)]
mod tests {
use super::*;
#[test]
fn test_add() { assert_eq!(add(2, 3), 5); }
}
// cargo test → panics at 'not yet implemented'
// GREEN: Replace todo!() with minimal implementation
pub fn add(a: i32, b: i32) -> i32 { a + b }
// cargo test → PASS, then REFACTOR while keeping tests green
```text
## Unit Tests
### Module-Level Test Organization
```rust
// src/user.rs
pub struct User {
pub name: String,
pub email: String,
}
impl User {
pub fn new(name: impl Into<String>, email: impl Into<String>) -> Result<Self, String> {
let email = email.into();
if !email.contains('@') {
return Err(format!("invalid email: {email}"));
}
Ok(Self { name: name.into(), email })
}
pub fn display_name(&self) -> &str {
&self.name
}
}
#[cfg(test)]
mod tests {
use super::*;
#[test]
fn creates_user_with_valid_email() {
let user = User::new("Alice", "[email protected]").unwrap();
assert_eq!(user.display_name(), "Alice");
assert_eq!(user.email, "[email protected]");
}
#[test]
fn rejects_invalid_email() {
let result = User::new("Bob", "not-an-email");
assert!(result.is_err());
assert!(result.unwrap_err().contains("invalid email"));
}
}
```text
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 471 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 049a5f6fca56
rust-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository bl1nk-bot/bl1nk-agents-manager (8 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 3,092 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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
testing-expert
Ultimate Kotlin testing skill. Use this whenever writing, reviewing, or debugging ANY Kotlin test — unit, integration, property-based, or coroutine. Covers TDD (RED/GREEN/REFACTOR), Kotest + MockK + Kover, anti-pattern detection, and four-pillar quality framework. Triggers on: write a test, add coverage, why is this…
fsharp-testing
F# testing patterns with xUnit, FsUnit, Unquote, FsCheck property-based testing, integration tests, and test organization best practices. Use when writing F# tests with xUnit, FsUnit, Unquote, or FsCheck.
python-testing
Python testing strategies using pytest, TDD methodology, fixtures, mocking, parametrization, and coverage requirements.
perl-testing
Perl testing patterns using Test2::V0, Test::More, prove runner, mocking, coverage with Devel::Cover, and TDD methodology.
cpp-testing
Use only when writing/updating/fixing C++ tests, configuring GoogleTest/CTest, diagnosing failing or flaky tests, or adding coverage/sanitizers.
python-testing-patterns
Implement comprehensive testing strategies with pytest, fixtures, mocking, and test-driven development. Use when writing Python tests, setting up test suites, or implementing testing best practices.