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 devantler-tech/agent-plugins --skill test-driven-developmentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/devantler-tech/agent-pluginsWrote 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/devantler-tech/agent-plugins/test-driven-development)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/devantler-tech/agent-plugins/test-driven-development"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/devantler-tech/agent-plugins/test-driven-development/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/devantler-tech/agent-plugins/test-driven-development"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/devantler-tech/agent-plugins/test-driven-development.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 | $0.00017 | $0.02409 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00964 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00482 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00241 |
Grade A, and why
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 26d 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to test-driven-development — 8 lines differ, 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 — 335 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test-Driven Development (TDD)
Overview
Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.
Core principle: If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.
Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.
When to Use
Always:
- New features
- Bug fixes
- Refactoring
- Behavior changes
Exceptions (ask your human partner):
- Throwaway prototypes
- Generated code
- Configuration files
Thinking "skip TDD just this once"? Stop. That's rationalization.
The Iron Law
NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.
No exceptions:
- Don't keep it as "reference"
- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
- Don't look at it
- Delete means delete
Implement fresh from tests. Period.
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
Write one minimal test showing what should happen.
const result = await retryOperation(operation);
expect(result).toBe('success'); expect(attempts).toBe(3); });
Clear name, tests real behavior, one thing
</Good>
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.
- 26d ago Changed · +10 lines e1b53288b11e
- 1mo ago First seen · 325 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 32b49218fe4c
test-driven-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository devantler-tech/agent-plugins (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 2,409 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to test-driven-development, differing in 8 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
tdd
Test-driven development — the red-green-refactor discipline for code that's correct by design, not by accident. INVOKE PROACTIVELY whenever writing or changing code, fixing a bug, adding or structuring tests, or choosing what to mock — even when nobody says "TDD" or "tests". (Tests are code held to…
eval-authoring
This skill should be used when the user mentions "llm eval", "evaluation", "promptfoo", "deepeval", "regression test", "llm judge", "golden dataset", "eval suite", "test a prompt", or wants to prove a prompt/model change improved rather than regressed behavior. It provides a standardized methodology for authoring…
improve-code-quality
Guided journey from a working-but-untested vibe-coded prototype to a production-ready product with tests, clean structure, a business-rules boundary, and resilience at scale. Orchestrates nine skills phase by phase - working-with-legacy-code, clean-code, refactoring-patterns, software-design-philosophy…
building
Use when writing production code test-first: the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle, false-RED detection, vertical slicing, scope escalation, test process discipline, and code generation patterns.
dotnet-verify
This skill should be used when working with Verify snapshot tests in .NET projects. Use when updating verified snapshots after intentional code changes, accepting new snapshots, discovering verify tests, or troubleshooting snapshot mismatches. Trigger phrases include "verify tests", "update snapshots", "accept…
tdd-with-phpunit
Apply RED-GREEN-REFACTOR with PHPUnit 10/11 for Symfony; KernelTestCase/WebTestCase, attributes (#[Test]/#[DataProvider]), Foundry.