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 evist0/okf-matt-skills --skill tddgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/evist0/okf-matt-skillsWrote 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/evist0/okf-matt-skills/tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/evist0/okf-matt-skills/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evist0/okf-matt-skills/tdd/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/evist0/okf-matt-skills/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evist0/okf-matt-skills/tdd.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00695 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00347 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00139 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00069 |
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 11d 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
95% identical to tdd — 20 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 — 37 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test-Driven Development
TDD is the red → green loop. This skill is the reference that makes that loop produce tests worth keeping: what a good test is, where tests go, the anti-patterns, and the rules of the loop. Every section applies on every cycle — consult them before and during the loop, not after.
When exploring the codebase, read the project's OKF knowledge bundle if it exists (knowledge/glossary/ for the domain language, knowledge/adr/ for decisions) so test names and interface vocabulary match the project's domain language, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.
What a good test is
Tests verify behavior through public interfaces, not implementation details. Code can change entirely; tests shouldn't. A good test reads like a specification — "user can checkout with valid cart" tells you exactly what capability exists — and survives refactors because it doesn't care about internal structure.
See tests.md for examples and mocking.md for mocking guidelines.
Seams — where tests go
A seam is the public boundary you test at: the interface where you observe behavior without reaching inside. Tests live at seams, never against internals.
Test only at pre-agreed seams. Before writing any test, write down the seams under test and confirm them with the user. No test is written at an unconfirmed seam. You can't test everything — agreeing the seams up front is how testing effort lands on the critical paths and complex logic instead of every edge case.
Ask: "What's the public interface, and which seams should we test?"
Anti-patterns
- Implementation-coupled — mocks internal collaborators, tests private methods, or verifies through a side channel (querying the database instead of using the interface). The tell: the test breaks when you refactor but behavior hasn't changed.
- Tautological — the assertion recomputes the expected value the way the code does (
expect(add(a, b)).toBe(a + b), a snapshot derived by hand the same way, a constant asserted equal to itself), so it passes by construction and can never disagree with the code. Expected values must come from an independent source of truth — a known-good literal, a worked example, the spec. - Horizontal slicing — writing all tests first, then all implementation. Bulk tests verify imagined behavior: you test the shape of things rather than user-facing behavior, the tests go insensitive to real changes, and you commit to test structure before understanding the implementation. Work in vertical slices instead — one test → one implementation → repeat, each test a tracer bullet that responds to what the last cycle taught you.
What ships with it
2 files 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.
- 11d ago First seen · 37 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A df656dd8ef4b
tdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository evist0/okf-matt-skills (13 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 695 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 95% identical to tdd, differing in 20 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
test-first-implementation
Implement behavior with a red-green-refactor loop, observable tests, and small vertical slices. Use when the user asks for TDD, test-first work, regression-first fixes, or a feature that needs clear behavior before implementation.
write-tests
Write meaningful tests from acceptance criteria, risk, security invariants, module boundaries, and regression history. Use when adding or updating tests, writing a test plan, or covering a new feature or bug fix.
phase-7-testing
Phase 7 — Test Strategy with pyramid, coverage gates, load tests, and Critical User Journeys.
tdd
Test-driven development with red-green-refactor loop. Use when user wants to build features or fix bugs using TDD, mentions "red-green-refactor", wants integration tests, or asks for test-first development.
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
iterative-development
TDD iteration loops using Claude Code Stop hooks - runs tests after each response, feeds failures back automatically.