Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dayvisonassis/sdd-skillsnpx agentmods add skills/dayvisonassis/sdd-skills/integration-test-validatorWrote 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/dayvisonassis/sdd-skills/integration-test-validator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dayvisonassis/sdd-skills/integration-test-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dayvisonassis/sdd-skills/integration-test-validator.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 5.1 | $0.00087 | $0.00981 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00044 | $0.00491 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00196 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00098 |
Grade A, and why
integration-test-validator 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 7d 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 — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Integration Test Validator (PABX)
Audit integration test files to ensure they comply with every rule the
integration-test-writer enforces. Read-only: produce a compliance report; never modify
test/production files, never execute tests (static analysis only).
Project scope: PABX backend. The full rule set is in
../integration-test-writer/references/pabx-rules.md— validate against it.
Scope: apps/backend/__tests__/integration/.
INPUT
test_file_path(required) — test file or directory.checklist_file_path(optional) — the.test.mdfor coverage cross-reference.target_file_or_endpoint(optional) — the controller/endpoint under test.severity_filter(optional) —critical|major|minor(default: all).
OUTPUT
A compliance report (English): summary counts, overall verdict (PASS = 0 critical + 0
major; PASS WITH WARNINGS = 0 critical, some major/minor; FAIL = ≥1 critical), each violation
([SEVERITY] Rule-ID, location, description, expected, found, fix), coverage analysis, and
positive findings. When dispatched by the evaluator, the verdict is the signal it consumes.
EXECUTION STEPS (3 Phases)
Phase 1 — Structural Analysis
Inventory describe/it/hooks/helpers. Map checklist ↔ tests and endpoint ↔ tests (if provided).
Identify every data-creation point and every cleanup point (try-finally, afterEach,
afterAll, direct deletes). Note imports.
Phase 2 — Rule-by-Rule Validation
Check EVERY rule from ../integration-test-writer/references/pabx-rules.md:
- Language & Naming [CRITICAL] — English only; descriptive names; no double blank lines.
- Test Structure [MAJOR] — AAA; independence; deterministic;
setupTestDatabase/cleanupTestDatabase/supertest/appfile pattern; no prod modification. - Data Cleanup [CRITICAL] —
try-finallyper data-creating test;try-catchinsidefinally; FK order (audit_logs→users_permissions/user_permissions_group→group_permissions→permissions→users→dr_agent→dr_domain); only test-created data; no data left behind; ≥2 cleanup levels. - Execution Setup [MAJOR] —
setupTestDatabase()inbeforeAll(destructuretoken);cleanupTestDatabase()inafterAll; correct imports. - Coverage [MAJOR] — CRUD, auth/authorization, validation errors, not-found, edge cases, security (SQLi/XSS), checklist alignment.
- Forbidden Practices [CRITICAL] — no prod modification; no external data scripts; no pre-existing-data removal; no afterEach-only cleanup for created data; no Portuguese.
- API Behavior [MINOR] — status assertions; response-body assertions; correct HTTP methods;
Authorizationheader on authenticated requests.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 74 lines · 87 tokens per session scan A c060bb4cedc8
integration-test-validator is a skill published in the GitHub repository dayvisonassis/sdd-skills (1 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 87 tokens to every session and 981 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
test-first-bugs
Enforces a test-driven bug-fixing workflow. Use when a user reports a bug, failing code, an error, or asks to fix something.
coverage-enhancer
Analyze existing test suites and source code to suggest additional unit tests that improve test coverage. Use this skill when working with test files and source code to identify untested code paths, missing edge cases, uncovered branches, untested error conditions, and gaps in test coverage. Supports major testing…
edge-case-generator
Automatically identify potential boundary and exception cases from requirements, specifications, or existing code, and generate comprehensive test cases targeting boundary conditions, edge cases, and uncommon scenarios. Use this skill when analyzing programs, code repositories, functions, or APIs to discover and test…
java-code-review
Review Java code for bugs, duplicate code, correctness risks, maintainability improvements, and missing tests. By default review files modified in git; when the user explicitly names files, classes, packages, or a diff, review that scope instead. Generate a detailed review.md report with actionable comments and fixes.
incremental-python-programmer
Takes a Python repository and natural language feature description as input, implements the feature with proper code placement, generates comprehensive tests, and ensures all tests pass. Use when Claude needs to: (1) Add new features to existing Python projects, (2) Implement functions, classes, or modules based on…