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 dmae97/omk --skill principle-test-behavior-not-implementationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dmae97/omkWrote 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/dmae97/omk/principle-test-behavior-not-implementation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dmae97/omk/principle-test-behavior-not-implementation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dmae97/omk/principle-test-behavior-not-implementation/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/dmae97/omk/principle-test-behavior-not-implementation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dmae97/omk/principle-test-behavior-not-implementation.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 | $0.00053 | $0.00552 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00221 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
pstack-principle-test-behavior-not-implementation 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 6d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- principle-test-behavior-not-implementation — 97% identical, 2 lines differ
What it actually says
Test Behavior, Not Implementation
A test is a claim about what the code does for its users: a caller, an end user, or another service. Behavior is what those users can observe through the interface they use. That includes return values, errors, state they can read back, and effects on systems outside the code, such as a request sent, a row written, or a message emitted. Implementation is what they cannot observe: private helpers, internal call order, intermediate data, and which internal collaborator did the work.
Judge each test against two imagined edits:
- Break the behavior. Make the code return a wrong value, skip an effect, or do the effect twice. If the test still passes, it proves nothing. The usual causes are an assertion looser than the contract, an expected value computed by the code under test, a restated constant or prompt string that never runs the code that reads it, and an assertion on data that the test built itself.
- Change the internals. Keep every observable result the same and restructure the code underneath. If the test now fails, it is pinned to the implementation. It will need a rewrite on every refactor and still catches no bug.
Keep a test that catches the first edit and survives the second. Rewrite or delete the rest. To write a test that does both, drive the code through its users' interface with a concrete input. Derive the expected value from the requirement, not from a run of the code. Assert what the contract promises, no less and no more.
The contract decides, not the shape of the assertion. When "an empty cart never charges" is the promise, an assertion that the payment client got no call is behavior. Pair it with a case where the charge happens, so that the test shows it can see a call. The payload that a mocked external service receives is behavior, because that service observes it. A call to an internal helper is implementation, because no user can see it. An empty list is the exact answer when no record matches, and a hollow check when the test only needs some result. An exact error message pins wording that no caller reads. The error type that callers branch on is the contract.
A test can pin an invariant instead of a call, such as a key that must exist in two tables or a compile-time type check. The invariant is the behavior.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 21 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 394876f47acf
pstack-principle-test-behavior-not-implementation is a skill published in the GitHub repository dmae97/omk (152 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 552 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-10-27.
Other skills, from other repositories
ci-triage
Diagnose failing CI, build, release-gate, or test runs for Cool Workflow. Use when a GitHub Actions check, local npm test, npm run build, release gate, smoke test, or generated-manifest check fails and Codex must identify the first actionable failure with logs and verifier commands.
deploy-check
Verify Cool Workflow release, publish, deploy, or package readiness. Use when Codex must check build/test gates, generated manifests, project index sync, dist/source contract, changelog/release notes, npm package contents, or pre-tag risk before shipping.
design-qa
Evaluate Cool Workflow architecture, product design, operator UX, context-pack, workflow-app, MCP/CLI, or release-process proposals. Use when Codex must decide whether a design respects FreeBSD/POLA, mechanism-not-policy, stable JSON surfaces, evidence, and verifier boundaries before implementation.
pr-review
Review Cool Workflow pull requests or branch diffs. Use when Codex must inspect code changes for bugs, regressions, FreeBSD/POLA violations, missing tests, generated artifact drift, release-contract risk, or CI implications, and return findings first with file/line citations.
e2e-testing
Guide for running end-to-end tests of the Qwen Code CLI, including headless mode, MCP server testing, and API traffic inspection. Use this skill whenever you need to verify CLI behavior with real model calls, reproduce user-reported bugs end-to-end, test MCP tool integrations, or inspect raw API request/response…
terminal-capture
Automates terminal UI screenshot testing for CLI commands. Applies when reviewing PRs that affect CLI output, testing slash commands (/about, /context, /auth, /export), generating visual documentation, or when 'terminal screenshot', 'CLI test', 'visual test', or 'terminal-capture' is mentioned.