Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/it235/multica-best-practicesnpx agentmods add skills/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-test-t2-coverageWrote 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/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-test-t2-coverage)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-test-t2-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-test-t2-coverage/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/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-test-t2-coverage"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/it235/multica-best-practices/multica-test-t2-coverage.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 | $0.00049 | $0.01182 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00473 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00236 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00118 |
Grade A, and why
multica-test-t2-coverage 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 1mo 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 — 113 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test Coverage T2 (Coverage Evaluation)
Only after G2 PASS, before T3. Evaluate "is T1 enough", do not execute environment verification.
Integrated from
ac-coverage-t2-squad. Material assembly rules seemultica-test-orchestration"Assemble from Comments".
5 Required Items (assemble from comments; stop if any missing)
| # | Required | How it counts as complete in comments |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Numbered AC- original text | AC pasted in comments/description, or openable Jira/PRD link |
| 2 | T1 Confluence link | t1-cases Confluence URL (preferred); or already-imported JIRA case set |
| 3 | G2 PASS evidence | Leader writes G2 PASS |
| 4 | Frontend + backend changes | SHA + file list, or MR/PR link |
| 5 | Post-implementation API contract | Apifox/OAS link, or N/A (reuse xxx) |
| Optional | Note |
|---|---|
| T1 design-trace summary | multica-test-t1-design design-trace table |
| T1 case-set link | URL of T1 case set already imported to test-management platform |
| Leader T1 review conclusion | review Pass record (not import authorization) |
Missing any required item → output orchestration "Interrupted: awaiting human to add to Issue comments" table, do not write a coverage conclusion.
Flow
- Read all comments, assemble the 5 items; if missing → interruption list, stop.
- Must read T1 artifact: T1 Confluence
t1-cases.mdlink (comments or JIRA description); T2 only writes delta relative to T1. - For each AC-: implementation evidence (diff/contract)? Can T1 actually verify it? Need new interface cases?
- Signal mapping: new path/field → supplement interface case; new page/popup → supplement functional case; pure refactor → regression risk; AC present but diff absent → implementation gap.
- Confluence landing + automation into repo (see §§ below) → return T2 link.
- Output the template below. Conclusion only:
evaluation completeorevaluation BLOCKED.
Supplemented cases must be written back to T1 Confluence: revise t1-cases → review → republish. After 👤 passphrase, optional XMind/JIRA phase C (see t1-design generation-workflow).
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · -9 tokens per session faa0bfb8927e
- 1mo ago First seen · 113 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 7f1046af2377
multica-test-t2-coverage is a skill published in the GitHub repository it235/multica-best-practices (212 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 1,182 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-07.
Other skills, from other repositories
adk-go-self-review
Review an ADK Go change the way a maintainer will — a fresh-context pass over the whole diff, five lenses (correctness and tests, scope, simplicity, style, adk-python parity), and the mutation check that proves your tests pin the change. Use before opening a PR, before any later push that changes code, and when asked…
adversarial-reviewer
Stress-test a code change for concrete correctness defects, unsafe assumptions, and failure modes. Use when the user explicitly asks for an adversarial review, a deep bug hunt, or to tear a change apart, or to check your own change before submitting it. Do not use for ordinary review, style feedback, or general…
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
semgrep-rule-variant-creator
Creates language variants of existing Semgrep rules. Use when porting a Semgrep rule to specified target languages. Takes an existing rule and target languages as input, produces independent rule+test directories for each language.
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
plugin-review
Review plugin quality with tiered checks and dependency scoping. Use for PR and pre-release audits.