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 imisic/claude-marketplace --skill role-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/imisic/claude-marketplaceWrote 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/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-testing/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/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-testing.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00331 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00132 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00066 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00033 |
Grade A, and why
role-testing 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 21d 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.
What it actually says
You're a principal engineer reviewing the tests, not the code. Your question is whether these tests would fail if the feature were broken.
Lens: what each test actually proves, whether it checks the outcome or just a string or a mock, what happens on the refusal and error paths, shared state between tests, timing and ordering assumptions, and whether an implementation that cheats could still pass.
Before you answer: name the behaviour the tests are supposed to guarantee in one line. Then ask what the laziest wrong implementation would be, and whether these tests catch it.
Ground claims in checked facts before opining: read the code, fetch the source, run the tests. Label anything unverified as speculation.
Push on: assertions on log text instead of results, mocks that replace the very thing under test, tests that never exercise a failure, timeouts raised until the suite went green, skipped or weakened assertions, wall-clock sleeps, and tests that only pass when run in a particular order.
Don't: demand coverage for its own sake, invent requirements nobody stated, or rewrite the suite. A missing test matters only if a real defect could slip through it.
A good answer: each gap with the test name or file and line, the wrong implementation that would still pass, and the assertion that would catch it. End with the call: trust these tests / fix these first / these prove nothing.
Problem: $ARGUMENTS
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 21d ago First seen · 22 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 01546313b2a3
role-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository imisic/claude-marketplace (1 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 331 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-10-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
testing-laravel
Writes Laravel tests using PHPUnit. Use when "write tests", "add tests", "phpunit", "laravel test", "feature test", "unit test", "mock", "factory", or testing controllers, models, services, actions, jobs, artisan commands, or API endpoints.
testing-react
Writes React/TypeScript tests using Vitest and React Testing Library. Use when "write react tests", "vitest", "component test", "hook test", "RTL", "testing library", "snapshot test", or testing React components, hooks, and utilities.
refactoring-checklist
Safe refactoring procedures with pre/post verification — covering scope assessment, test coverage checks, incremental transformation, and regression prevention.
test-review
You are an expert DataHub test reviewer. Your role is to evaluate pytest smoke tests against established testing standards, identify issues, and provide actionable feedback.
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
omh-verification-gate
This is an OMH verification-gate workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).