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 BlueprintOS/analysis-to-delivery --skill tddgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/BlueprintOS/analysis-to-deliveryWrote 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/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/tdd/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/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/tdd.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 | $0.00049 | $0.00654 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00327 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00131 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
tdd 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.
What it actually says
TDD(桥接到 superpowers)
Contract
- Inputs: executable task from writing plan, test target, acceptance criteria
- Outputs: RED test, GREEN implementation, refactor notes
- Gates: RED observed before implementation; GREEN observed after implementation
- Required disciplines:
stage-gate - Next:
/executing-plans
本仓库不维护此 skill 的内容。完整纪律请读:
<SUPERPOWERS_SKILL_ROOT>/tdd/SKILL.md
何时调
- writing-plans 之后
- 每个子任务开始时(红绿循环)
衔接点
- 产出:RED 测试 + GREEN 实现 + REFACTOR
- 下一步:
/executing-plans(commit + 下一任务) - 门控:
disciplines/stage-gate第 3 层(RED 必须确认失败才能写实现)
降级方案(superpowers 未装时)
如果 <SUPERPOWERS_SKILL_ROOT>/tdd/ 不存在,严格按以下 4 步红绿循环:
1. RED — 写失败测试
- 在
src/test/写测试,只测一个最小行为 - 跑测试 → 必须确认失败(看到红色 / FAILURE,不是 BUILD SUCCESS)
- ❌ 跳过 RED = 你不知道测试到底在测什么
2. 最小实现
- 写最少量代码让测试通过(可以丑 / 可以硬编码)
- 不优化、不重构、不扩展
3. GREEN — 跑通
- 再跑测试 → 必须确认通过(看到 BUILD SUCCESS / PASSED)
- ❌ 测试莫名通过 = 测试没断言你想要的东西
4. REFACTOR — 重构
- 改进实现 / 抽取方法 / 命名优化
- 每次重构后必须重跑测试确认仍 GREEN
- 改完再跑 = 唯一能防止重构破坏功能的方法
最小纪律摘要
- RED 必须亲眼看到失败:写测试 → 跑 → 看 stack trace → 才写实现
- GREEN 后才能 REFACTOR:实现未通过前重构 = 在错的地基上盖楼
- 测试一次只测一个行为:堆叠断言 = 失败时不知道哪个挂了
- 不 mock 你要测的东西:只 mock 边界 IO
安装提示
npx skills@latest add obra/superpowers-tdd
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 · 70 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 9ef5b1e73524
tdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository BlueprintOS/analysis-to-delivery (26 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 654 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
developing-features-tdd
Build a new feature using strict test-driven development — UNDERSTAND → DESIGN → RED → VERIFY RED → GREEN → VERIFY GREEN → REFACTOR → VALIDATE → REPEAT. Use when building a new feature with TDD, when the user says "TDD this", "tests first", "red green refactor", or asks for feature work that needs to be verifiable…
fixing-bugs
Fix a bug using strict TDD — UNDERSTAND → REPRODUCE (RED) → VERIFY RED → FIX → VERIFY GREEN → VALIDATE → REFACTOR. Use when the user reports a bug, asks to fix something, mentions a Sentry/error/regression, or pastes a stack trace. Bugs require a failing test that proves the bug existed before any code change. For…
agent-evaluation
Use when testing skills, commands, or agents for quality. Use after creating new skills, before deploying agents, or when debugging inconsistent agent behavior. Triggers on "evaluate", "test quality", "is this skill working", or QA of AI workflows.
tdd
Apply when adding new behavior or fixing a bug. Red-green-refactor cycle, test-first discipline, when TDD doesn't pay.
systematic-debugging
4-phase root cause debugging: understand bugs before fixing.
test-driven-development
TDD: enforce RED-GREEN-REFACTOR, tests before code.