xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review

xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from getsentry/XcodeBuildMCP. It costs 34 tokens per session (330 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A review guide for checking whether XcodeBuildMCP tests use the right boundaries between unit tests, snapshots, schemas, smoke tests, and external processes. It focuses on tests for tools that work with Xcode, Apple’s development environment.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it when reviewing tests, fixtures, snapshots, schemas, or test utilities in XcodeBuildMCP.
Why use it?
It helps keep unit tests isolated from real Xcode commands, devices, and simulators while ensuring snapshots and schemas still verify important contracts.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

About the project

XcodeBuildMCP is an MCP server and command-line tool that gives coding agents tools for building and working on iOS and macOS projects. It supports workflows involving Xcode and xcodebuild, including project builds and device-related operations. Its catalogue add-ons provide agent instructions and connections for using the MCP server and CLI.

getsentry/XcodeBuildMCP · 6,336 stars · on GitHub

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/getsentry/xcodebuildmcp/xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review
Any agent
npx skills add getsentry/XcodeBuildMCP --skill xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/getsentry/XcodeBuildMCP

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/getsentry/xcodebuildmcp/xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/getsentry/xcodebuildmcp/xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/getsentry/xcodebuildmcp/xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/getsentry/xcodebuildmcp/xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 34 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 330 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00034 $0.00330
Opus 5 $0.00017 $0.00165
Sonnet 5 $0.00007 $0.00066
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00033

Measured 5d ago against content hash 7607971e1b4f, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review 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 5d 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.

.agents/skills/xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review/SKILL.md · 42 lines

What it actually says

XcodeBuildMCP Test Boundary Review

Review guardrails for test isolation, scope, and contract validation.

Review scope

  • Review-only by default.
  • Do not edit product code unless the user explicitly requests implementation changes.

Files to inspect

  • src/**/__tests__/**
  • src/test-utils/**
  • src/snapshot-tests/**
  • scripts/**/__tests__/**
  • package.json
  • xcodebuildmcp.com/app/docs/_content/testing.mdx
  • xcodebuildmcp.com/app/docs/_content/contributing.mdx

Guardrails

  • Unit tests inject command/filesystem/external dependencies.
  • Unit tests do not call real xcodebuild, xcrun, AXe, devices, or simulators.
  • Prefer testing logic/executor functions over handler wrappers unless testing runtime integration.
  • Use existing mock executor helpers.
  • Treat snapshot updates as contract changes requiring review.
  • Do not add fake e2e/snapshot state to force test success.
  • Avoid unsafe TypeScript suppressions.

Validation

  • Run targeted Vitest command for touched tests.
  • npm test
  • npm run typecheck
  • If fixtures/schemas changed: npm run test:snapshots and npm run test:schema-fixtures
  • npx skill-check .agents/skills/xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review
Changes

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.

  1. 5d ago First seen · 42 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 7607971e1b4f

Subscribe to this mod's changes

xcodebuildmcp-test-boundary-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository getsentry/XcodeBuildMCP (6,336 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 330 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.