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 ccbud/CCBuddy --skill web-gui-testergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ccbud/CCBuddyWrote 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/ccbud/ccbuddy/web-gui-tester)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ccbud/ccbuddy/web-gui-tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ccbud/ccbuddy/web-gui-tester/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/ccbud/ccbuddy/web-gui-tester"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ccbud/ccbuddy/web-gui-tester.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 | $0.00132 | $0.03146 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00053 | $0.01258 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00629 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00315 |
Grade A, and why
web-gui-tester 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 yesterday.
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 web-gui-tester, 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 — 158 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Core Principles
- Pure GUI black-box testing: Interact only with elements that are visible and operable on the page, simulating real user behavior. During verification, screenshots and/or read-only DOM inspection are allowed, but injecting JavaScript to modify page state, trigger interactions, or bypass frontend logic is strictly prohibited.
- Faithful to the actual page: All conclusions must be based on the page’s actual behavior. Do not guess or speculate. If a normal GUI operation fails, stop and report it; do not use alternative methods to force progress.
- Separate testing from fixing: Do not modify the code under test during testing. If a bug blocks the current path, record the issue, skip that path, and continue testing other unaffected points. Only begin fixing bugs after testing is explicitly declared complete and the user has explicitly or implicitly requested code changes.
- Cross-validate code and visuals: Observations must include both read-only code verification (DOM state checks) and visual verification using screenshots. The two must corroborate each other and cannot replace one another. A test point without at least one visually inspected screenshot as evidence—an image returned directly by the tool, or a screenshot file read using the Read tool—must be considered incomplete. Do not conclude that a test point passed or failed without such evidence.
- Follow the browser tooling’s own usage rules: Run the test with whatever browser automation tooling the session actually provides (a browser automation MCP tool, a built-in browser runtime, etc.). If that tooling ships its own usage skill or API documentation, complete its required initialization and read that documentation first, and obey its rules for actions, element location, waiting, and observation throughout the test. This skill defines the testing methodology only; when it conflicts with the tooling’s own rules, the tooling’s rules win.
Phase One: Scenario Assessment and Test Planning
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.
- yesterday First seen · 158 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A df8103c10e25
web-gui-tester is a skill published in the GitHub repository ccbud/CCBuddy (8 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 132 tokens to every session and 3,146 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to web-gui-tester, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
dogfood
Exploratory QA of web apps: find bugs, evidence, reports.
agent-browser
Use the host-side agent-browser CLI for local browser smoke tests, screenshots, snapshots, and simple UI validation against forwarded localhost URLs.
browser-automation
Browser automation powers web testing, scraping, and AI agent interactions. The difference between a flaky script and a reliable system comes down to understanding selectors, waiting strategies, and anti-detection patterns. This skill covers Playwright (recommended) and Puppeteer, with patterns for testing, scraping…
playwright-skill
Complete browser automation with Playwright. Auto-detects dev servers, writes clean test scripts to /tmp. Test pages, fill forms, take screenshots, check responsive design, validate UX, test login flows, check links, automate any browser task. Use when user wants to test websites, automate browser interactions…
webapp-testing
Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using Playwright. Supports verifying frontend functionality, debugging UI behavior, capturing browser screenshots, and viewing browser logs.
playwright-cli
Automates browser interactions for web testing, form filling, screenshots, and data extraction using playwright-cli. Use when the user needs to navigate websites, interact with web pages, fill forms, take screenshots, test web applications, extract information from web pages, mock network requests, manage browser…