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 datit309/supergraph --skill tddgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/datit309/supergraphWrote 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/datit309/supergraph/tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/datit309/supergraph/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/datit309/supergraph/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/datit309/supergraph/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/datit309/supergraph/tdd.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00029 | $0.01215 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00486 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00243 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00121 |
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 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 — 154 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/supergraph:tdd
Requires healthy index_status for CBM_PROJECT (see references/codebase-memory-contract.md with codebase-memory-mcp); if stale/degraded → index_repository before graph calls.
Strict TDD for features, bug fixes, refactors.
Iron Law: NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
Delete means delete: Production code written before verified failing test → delete and restart from RED.
When
Full TDD: new features, behavior changes, refactoring. Fast TDD: bug fixes (add regression test → RED verify → minimal fix). Ask to skip: config-only, generated code, throwaway prototype, docs-only.
State Machine (in order, never skip)
needs_test → red_verified → green_verified → refactor_allowed → complete
Steps
0. Announce
"🔴 /supergraph:tdd — TDD: [full|fast] for [behavior]..."
1. Identify One Behavior
Behavior: [single externally visible behavior]
Test file: [path] | Test name: [name]
Command: [focused test command]
Expected RED: [why it should fail before implementation]
One behavior per test. Public behavior, not internals. Real code over mocks.
For a falsifiability checklist, read writing-good-tests.md before finalizing a test.
2. 🔴 RED — Write + Verify in One Round
Write one failing test, then run immediately:
<write test> && $TEST_CMD <focused command>
Valid 🔴 RED: fails for the expected missing behavior, not syntax/import/typo.
Record evidence:
## TDD Evidence — 🔴 RED
- 🔴 RED: `[command]` → FAIL ([expected missing behavior])
Serena diagnostics (optional): See serena/SKILL.md:Setup — get_diagnostics_for_file before/after GREEN; use replace_symbol_body/rename_symbol over raw edits. Skip if SERENA_ACTIVE=false or unavailable.
Invalid RED → fix test setup, don't write production code yet.
3. 🟢 GREEN — Minimal Implementation
Write only enough code to pass the test. No abstractions, no cleanup, no extra features.
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · +2 lines 4814f97aeaf9
- 1mo ago First seen · 152 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 1717b2cbf382
tdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository datit309/supergraph (21 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 1,215 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
playwright-cli
Automates browser interactions for testing and validating your own web applications using playwright-cli. Use when you need terminal-first browser control for navigation, form filling, screenshots, tracing, bound browser sessions, debugging, or generating Playwright test code. Only use against applications you own or…
playwright-frontend
For frontend engineers authoring UI — how to make components reliably locatable by tests and AI agents. Covers the official Playwright locator priority, semantic/accessible markup first, and how to add valid, unique, stable data-testid attributes (naming convention, uniqueness in lists, stability rules) for React…
playwright-qa
QA engineering workflows on top of Playwright. Use when a QA engineer asks to design test cases from a ticket, PRD or acceptance criteria, decide what to automate, write a bug report from a failing test or trace, convert manual test cases (TestRail, Xray, CSV) into Playwright specs with case-ID traceability, or review…
tdd-workflow
A test-first development workflow, commonly called TDD, where a failing test is written before the code that should make it pass. The cycle then adds the smallest working change and cleans it up.
pdlc-feature
An automated workflow for taking a new software feature from a description or requirements document through requirements, design, testing, implementation, review, and release preparation. It keeps one feature ID across the documents and requires tests before implementation.
pdlc-tdd
A test-first development workflow guided by existing design documents. TDD means writing tests before the code they check; PDLC is a staged product-development process with required preparation steps.