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 eric861129/SKILLS_All-in-one --skill test-fixinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/eric861129/SKILLS_All-in-oneWrote 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/eric861129/skills_all-in-one/test-fixing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/eric861129/skills_all-in-one/test-fixing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/eric861129/skills_all-in-one/test-fixing/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/eric861129/skills_all-in-one/test-fixing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/eric861129/skills_all-in-one/test-fixing.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 | $0.00044 | $0.00678 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00339 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00136 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
test-fixing 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 10d 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
100% identical to test-fixing — 0 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 — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test Fixing
Systematically identify and fix all failing tests using smart grouping strategies.
When to Use
- Explicitly asks to fix tests ("fix these tests", "make tests pass")
- Reports test failures ("tests are failing", "test suite is broken")
- Completes implementation and wants tests passing
- Mentions CI/CD failures due to tests
Systematic Approach
1. Initial Test Run
Run make test to identify all failing tests.
Analyze output for:
- Total number of failures
- Error types and patterns
- Affected modules/files
2. Smart Error Grouping
Group similar failures by:
- Error type: ImportError, AttributeError, AssertionError, etc.
- Module/file: Same file causing multiple test failures
- Root cause: Missing dependencies, API changes, refactoring impacts
Prioritize groups by:
- Number of affected tests (highest impact first)
- Dependency order (fix infrastructure before functionality)
3. Systematic Fixing Process
For each group (starting with highest impact):
-
Identify root cause
- Read relevant code
- Check recent changes with
git diff - Understand the error pattern
-
Implement fix
- Use Edit tool for code changes
- Follow project conventions (see CLAUDE.md)
- Make minimal, focused changes
-
Verify fix
- Run subset of tests for this group
- Use pytest markers or file patterns:
uv run pytest tests/path/to/test_file.py -v uv run pytest -k "pattern" -v - Ensure group passes before moving on
-
Move to next group
4. Fix Order Strategy
Infrastructure first:
- Import errors
- Missing dependencies
- Configuration issues
Then API changes:
- Function signature changes
- Module reorganization
- Renamed variables/functions
Finally, logic issues:
- Assertion failures
- Business logic bugs
- Edge case handling
5. Final Verification
After all groups fixed:
- Run complete test suite:
make test - Verify no regressions
- Check test coverage remains intact
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 110 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 391f286dd828
test-fixing is a skill published in the GitHub repository eric861129/SKILLS_All-in-one (52 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 678 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to test-fixing, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
test-fix
Automatically invoke when any test run produces failures. Triggers on: test output showing FAIL, test errors, or assertion failures in unit or E2E suites. Applies a strict 3-attempt limit per failure to avoid debugging spirals — stops and escalates if not resolved. Do NOT wait for user to ask; invoke immediately when…
diagnosing-bugs
Diagnose bugs with a reproducible red signal, minimized case, ranked hypotheses, and regression test.
lsp-refactor
End-to-end safe refactor workflow — blast-radius analysis, speculative preview, apply to disk, verify build, run affected tests. Inlines lsp-impact + lsp-safe-edit + lsp-verify + lsp-test-correlation into one coordinated sequence.
lamina-verify
Verify graph-backed product Missions after ordinary implementation work or when explicitly invoked as lamina-verify. Run isolated Persona and live UI audits; explicit verification is source-read-only.
workflow-preflight
Run code quality checks (typecheck, lint, tests) - auto-detects configured tools and offers to fix issues.
debugging
Use when debugging bugs, test failures, or unexpected behavior. Triggers: 'why isn't this working', 'this doesn't work', 'X is broken', 'something's wrong', 'getting an error', 'exception in', 'stopped working', 'regression', 'crash', 'hang', 'flaky test', 'intermittent failure', or when user pastes a stack…