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 drafthq/draft --skill coveragegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/drafthq/draftWrote 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/drafthq/draft/coverage)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/drafthq/draft/coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/drafthq/draft/coverage/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/drafthq/draft/coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/drafthq/draft/coverage.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Rogue Agent · line 8 Skill establishes unauthorized persistence across sessions via cron jobs, startup scripts, or state files. Session persistence allows an attacker to maintain access beyond the current interaction.Fix: Remove any persistence mechanisms (cron jobs, startup scripts, state files). Skills should not maintain state across sessions without explicit user consent.
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 | $0.00031 | $0.03976 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.01590 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00795 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00398 |
Grade A, and why
coverage 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 — 358 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Coverage Report
You are computing and reporting code coverage for the active track or a specific module. This complements the TDD workflow — TDD is the process (write test, implement, refactor), coverage is the measurement (how much code do those tests exercise).
Red Flags - STOP if you're
- Reporting coverage without actually running the coverage tool
- Making up coverage percentages
- Skipping uncovered line analysis
- Not presenting the report for developer approval
- Treating this as a replacement for TDD (it's not — TDD stays in
/draft:implement)
Step 1: Load Context
- Read
draft/tech-stack.mdfor test framework and language info - Find active track from
draft/tracks.md - If track has
architecture.md(track-level) or project has.ai-context.md, identify current module for scoping - Look for
coverage_targetindraft/workflow.md. Check for per-module targets first (see Per-Module Coverage Enforcement below); if absent, default to 95%. - Check if
draft/tracks/<id>/bughunt-report-latest.md(track scope) ordraft/bughunt-report-latest.md(project scope) exists for cross-referencing (see Coverage-Bughunt Cross-Reference below)
If no active track and no argument provided:
- Tell user: "No active track. Provide a path or track ID, or run
/draft:new-trackfirst."
Step 2: Detect Coverage Tool
Preferred: use the deterministic detect-test-framework.sh wrapper — it emits JSON {languages:[{language,framework,runner_command,test_globs,config_file}]}. Resolve via the canonical tool resolver (see core/shared/tool-resolver.md):
DRAFT_TOOLS="${DRAFT_PLUGIN_ROOT:-$(cat ~/.cache/draft/plugin-root 2>/dev/null)}/scripts/tools"
[ -d "$DRAFT_TOOLS" ] || DRAFT_TOOLS="$(ls -d ~/.claude/plugins/cache/*/draft/*/scripts/tools 2>/dev/null | sort -V | tail -1)"
[ -d "$DRAFT_TOOLS" ] || DRAFT_TOOLS="$(ls -d ~/.claude/plugins/marketplaces/*draft*/scripts/tools 2>/dev/null | tail -1)"
[ -d "$DRAFT_TOOLS" ] || DRAFT_TOOLS="$PWD/scripts/tools"
[ -x "$DRAFT_TOOLS/detect-test-framework.sh" ] && \
bash "$DRAFT_TOOLS/detect-test-framework.sh" --root .
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 First seen · 358 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 6edfa8d6c583
coverage is a skill published in the GitHub repository drafthq/draft (40 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 3,976 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
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
gentle-ai-bench
Trigger: bench, journey, journeys, driven mode, gentle-ai-bench, journey corpus, j-numbers, bench axis. Author and verify gentle-ai bench journeys; go test ./bench never proves driven execution.
gentle-ai-collab-perfect
Trigger: contributing to Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai as an external collaborator. Strict issue-first workflow, honest PR bodies, contributor-vs-maintainer scope, chained-PR strategy, verification protocol, docstring coverage. Load whenever the active repo is Gentleman-Programming/gentle-ai and any part of the…
issue-creation
Trigger: issue creation, bug reports, feature requests, or issue approval. Create and triage GitHub issues from repository evidence.
branch-pr
Create Gentle AI pull requests with issue-first checks. Trigger: creating, opening, or preparing PRs for review.
skill-creator
Trigger: new skills, agent instructions, documenting AI usage patterns. Create LLM-first skills with valid frontmatter.