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 agentmods add skills/flasherses/claude-code-dotfiles/test-case-writernpx skills add flasherses/claude-code-dotfiles --skill test-case-writergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/flasherses/claude-code-dotfilesWrote 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/flasherses/claude-code-dotfiles/test-case-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/flasherses/claude-code-dotfiles/test-case-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/flasherses/claude-code-dotfiles/test-case-writer.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 | $0.00187 | $0.08092 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00093 | $0.04046 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00037 | $0.01618 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00809 |
Grade A, and why
test-case-writer 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 3d 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 — 514 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test Case Writer
做什么：从需求文档或代码出发，产出结构化的测试用例文档、自测清单和可执行测试脚本，覆盖研发自测的 6 个维度（黑盒功能/边界/异常 + 白盒单元/覆盖率/集成）。
本 Skill 聚焦研发侧 R 的六类测试。 不设计兼容性、探索性、性能、安全、回归测试用例——这些由测试角色负责。
为什么：DORA 2025 数据显示 AI 生成代码的 Bug 率是人工的 1.7 倍——跳过测试不是"少几个用例"，而是把质量风险直接推到生产环境。TDD 先行是唯一对冲策略：编码前出用例，以"让测试变绿"驱动编码。
要不要做：先判断。纯写代码不涉及测试设计（如"写个 utils 函数"）、只需要跑已有测试或审查→不需要本 skill。代码已写好才来补用例→走反哺模式，不要假装是正常模式。
模式选择
| 场景 | 模式 | 触发词 |
|---|---|---|
| 新需求，还没写代码 | 正常模式 Step 0→1→1.5→2→3→4 | "写测试用例"、"出用例" |
| 已有功能，反向补充 | 反哺模式 Step A→B→C | "补测"、"反哺"、"补充用例" |
| 已有完整用例文档+脚本 | 不触发，直接补充 1-2 个用例 | — |
适用判断
执行前检查：
用户要的是"测试用例文档"还是"测试用例文档 + 可执行测试脚本"？
├─ 测试用例文档 only → Step 0-3（跳过脚本生成）
├─ 测试用例文档 + 脚本 → Step 0-4（完整流程）
└─ 只需要跑已有测试/审查已有测试 → 不需要本 skill
跳过本 skill 的情况：
- 已有完整测试用例文档和脚本，只需补充 1-2 个用例 → 直接补充
- 纯写代码不涉及测试设计（如"写个 utils 函数"）
- 用户只需要跑测试或审查测试，不需要设计新用例
前置条件
本 skill 假设：被测功能已有明确的需求描述或设计文档。如果还没有，先和用户口头确认功能的输入/输出/行为边界，替代设计文档作为用例设计的输入。不要在没有需求输入的情况下凭空设计用例。
执行前确认：被测代码存在 + 构建文件含测试依赖 + 了解已有测试风格（如存在）。Step 0 已自动化此过程。
快速决策：用哪种测试
用户要测什么？
├─ "这个功能对不对？" / "does this work?"
│ → 黑盒：功能测试 → references/blackbox-functional.md
├─ "边界在哪里？" / "where are the boundaries?" / "edge cases"
│ → 黑盒：边界值测试 → references/blackbox-boundary.md
│ （含空值/null/空串/0值——这些都是边界，不是功能变体）
├─ "异常怎么处理？" / "how are errors handled?" / "failure modes"
│ → 黑盒：异常流程测试 → references/blackbox-exception.md
├─ "这个函数对吗？" / "is this function correct?" / "unit test"
│ → 白盒：单元测试 → references/whitebox-unit.md
├─ "测够了没有？" / "is coverage enough?" / "what's uncovered?"
│ → 白盒：代码覆盖率 → references/whitebox-coverage.md
└─ "接口通不通？" / "does the API work?" / "integration test"
→ 白盒：接口集成测试 → references/whitebox-integration.md
空值 = 边界，不是功能：
uniqueNumber: ""/age: null/name: ""是边界值测试，不要归入功能测试。功能测试关注的是有效输入的不同组合和场景变体。
| 测试类型 | 关注点 | 设计方法 | 适用阶段 | 为什么需要 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 黑盒-功能 | 输入→输出是否正确 | 等价类划分 + 场景枚举 | 需求确认后 | 验证需求实现——用户不会按你的代码路径操作 |
| 黑盒-边界 | 边界值处理是否正确 | 边界值分析（±0, ±1） | 功能测试后 | bug 集中在边界——max/max+1 之间差的是 crash |
| 黑盒-异常 | 错误输入/异常路径 | 错误推测 + 异常路径遍历 | 功能测试后 | 用户给的输入永远是脏的——不测异常等于赌用户不乱点 |
| 白盒-单元 | 函数/方法逻辑正确性 | 语句/分支/路径覆盖 | 编码时 (TDD) | 最快的反馈循环——秒级知道改坏了什么 |
| 白盒-覆盖率 | 测试充分性度量 | 行/分支/方法覆盖率 | 单元测试后 | 80% 行覆盖 != 测够了——可能全是没 assert 的执行 |
| 白盒-集成 | 接口契约+数据流正确性 | 接口规格 × 数据组合 | 模块完成后 | 单元测试全过接口照样炸——序列化、中间件、拦截器单元测不到 |
What ships with it
11 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.
- assets/自测清单模板.md 1.2 KB
- references/blackbox-boundary.md 4.2 KB
- references/blackbox-exception.md 5.4 KB
- references/blackbox-functional.md 3.9 KB
- references/few-shot-examples.md 3.2 KB
- references/pitfalls.md 2.0 KB
- references/script-generation-guide.md 3.1 KB
- references/whitebox-coverage.md 3.4 KB
- references/whitebox-integration.md 5.9 KB
- references/whitebox-unit.md 5.5 KB
- trigger_eval.json 2.0 KB
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 514 lines · 187 tokens per session scan A 37ac7c2bdaa0
test-case-writer is a skill published in the GitHub repository flasherses/claude-code-dotfiles (5 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 187 tokens to every session and 8,092 once invoked, about $0.0009 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…