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/christopherarter/superpowers-reasonix/superpowers-test-driven-developmentnpx skills add christopherarter/superpowers-reasonix --skill superpowers-test-driven-developmentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/christopherarter/superpowers-reasonixWrote 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/christopherarter/superpowers-reasonix/superpowers-test-driven-development)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/christopherarter/superpowers-reasonix/superpowers-test-driven-development"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/christopherarter/superpowers-reasonix/superpowers-test-driven-development.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00023 | $0.01891 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00945 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00378 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00189 |
Grade A, and why
superpowers-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 4d 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 — 273 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test-Driven Development (TDD)
Overview
Test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.
Core principle: Didn't watch the test fail? You don't know it tests the right thing.
Break the letter of the rules = break the spirit.
When to Use
Always: new features, bug fixes, refactors, behavior changes.
Exceptions (ask your human partner): throwaway prototypes, generated code, config files.
"Skip TDD just this once"? Stop. That's rationalization.
The Iron Law
NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
Code before the test? Delete it. Start over. Don't keep it as "reference", don't "adapt" it, don't look at it. Delete means delete. Implement fresh from tests.
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
One minimal test. Shows what should happen.
const result = await retryOperation(operation);
expect(result).toBe('success'); expect(attempts).toBe(3); });
Clear name, real behavior, one thing
</Good>
<Bad>
```typescript
test('retry works', async () => {
const mock = jest.fn()
.mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())
.mockRejectedValueOnce(new Error())
.mockResolvedValueOnce('success');
await retryOperation(mock);
expect(mock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(3);
});
Vague name, tests mock not code
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 273 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 252da0fabcec
superpowers-test-driven-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository christopherarter/superpowers-reasonix (96 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 1,891 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
test-driven-development
Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code.
skillshare-implement-feature
Implement a feature from a spec file or description using TDD workflow. Use this skill whenever the user asks to: add a new CLI command, implement a feature from a spec, build new functionality, add a flag, create a new internal package, or write Go code for skillshare. This skill enforces test-first development…
test-driven-development
在实现任何功能或修复 bug 时使用,在编写实现代码之前.
skill-creator
Create new skills, modify and improve existing skills, and measure skill performance. Use when users want to create a skill from scratch, edit, or optimize an existing skill, run evals to test a skill, benchmark skill performance with variance analysis, or optimize a skill's description for better triggering accuracy.
gh-pr-review
Automated Cherry Studio review for local branches, PRs, commits, files, architecture docs, and repository skills. Use for code or documentation reviews that need project-specific naming, main/renderer/shared placement and dependency rules, IpcApi and DataApi boundaries, lifecycle/service ownership, renderer hooks…
prepare-release
Prepare a new release by collecting commits, generating bilingual release notes, updating version files, and creating a release branch. Use when asked to prepare/create a release, bump version, or run /prepare-release.