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 epicsagas/epic-harness --skill tddgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/epicsagas/epic-harnessWrote 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/epicsagas/epic-harness/tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/epicsagas/epic-harness/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/epicsagas/epic-harness/tdd.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00850 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00425 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00170 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00085 |
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 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 — 65 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
TDD — Test-Driven Development
Iron Law
NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST. Violating the letter of this process is violating the spirit of this process.
Process
Red → Green → Refactor
-
Red: Write a failing test that describes the desired behavior
- Test name should read like a spec:
it("returns 401 when token is expired")(reason: the test name IS your specification — it must communicate intent to future readers) - Run the test — confirm it fails for the right reason (reason: a test that fails for the wrong reason gives false confidence)
- Test name should read like a spec:
-
Green: Write the minimum code to make the test pass
- Do not write more than needed — because premature optimization is the root of all evil; make it work first
- Do not optimize yet — because optimization without a passing test is speculation, not engineering
- Run the test — confirm it passes (reason: a passing test is the only proof the code works)
-
Refactor: Clean up without changing behavior
- Extract duplicates, rename for clarity, simplify — because readability matters more than cleverness
- Run tests again — must still pass (reason: refactoring without re-running tests is just renaming bugs)
Cycle
Repeat for each behavior. One test, one behavior, one cycle — because scope creep in a single test cycle leads to unverified code.
When to Trigger
/gosubagents: always — because autonomous agents without TDD produce unverified code- New function or method being written
- Bug fix (write regression test first — because a bug that happened once will happen again without a guard)
Anti-Rationalization
| Excuse | Rebuttal | What to do instead |
|---|---|---|
| "This is too simple for tests" | Simple code still breaks. The Beyonce Rule applies: if you liked it, you should have put a test on it. | Write the test anyway — it takes 30 seconds and catches edge cases. |
| "I'll write tests after" | That's documentation, not specification. Tests written after confirm what you built; tests written before define what you should build. | Write the test first. If you can't describe the behavior, you don't understand the requirement. |
| "Tests slow me down" | 15 minutes of TDD saves hours of debugging regression bugs later. | Time the cycle — Red-Green-Refactor is usually faster than debug-after-deploy. |
| "I'll just test manually" | Manual tests don't catch regressions. Automate it once, save hours forever. | Write an automated test that runs on every commit. |
| "The types guarantee correctness" | Types check shape, not logic. add(a,b) can still return a-b. |
Write a test that verifies the actual business rule, not just the type signature. |
| "I need to see the API shape first" | Spike freely, then delete and rebuild test-first. A throwaway spike is research, not implementation. | Spike, discard, then TDD the real implementation from what you learned. |
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 · 65 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A d67e81436b05
tdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository epicsagas/epic-harness (18 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 850 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
test-writer
Writes tests that fail before a fix and pass after it.
tdd
Test-driven development — write the failing test first, then the code. Triggers on TDD, test first, write tests, test-driven.
taiyi-dev
A software-development stage that implements planned tasks using test-driven development, or TDD: write a failing test, make it pass, then improve the code. It checks the task plan, dependencies, file boundaries, and required completion evidence.
tdd-cycle
Execute full TDD red-green-refactor cycle with validation gates. Use when saying "TDD cycle", "test-driven development", or "full TDD workflow".
atomic-tdd
Test-first discipline. Auto-triggers on "let's implement X", "add feature Y", "fix bug Z", "write a test for", "implement", "build out", and similar pre-code-change phrases. Iron rule: failing test exists before production code. Skip only for pure docs/config changes with an explicit "skipped because:" note. Explicit…
ralphctl-test-driven-development
Execute-phase skill — write the failing test before the code that makes it pass; for bug fixes, this is the reproduction test itself. Use for any logic change, bug fix, or behavioural modification; for the full root-cause triage pipeline around an unexpected failure, see ralphctl-debugging-and-error-recovery.