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 iusztinpaul/squid --skill squid-testing-pythongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/iusztinpaul/squidWrote 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/iusztinpaul/squid/squid-testing-python)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/iusztinpaul/squid/squid-testing-python"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iusztinpaul/squid/squid-testing-python/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/iusztinpaul/squid/squid-testing-python"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iusztinpaul/squid/squid-testing-python.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00032 | $0.01119 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00448 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00224 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00112 |
Grade A, and why
squid-testing-python 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 — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Writing Effective Python Tests
Test Structure
Mirror the module layout
Keep a one-to-one relationship between test files and the modules they cover: myapp/service.py → tests/.../test_service.py. This makes the test for any given module obvious and keeps coverage gaps visible.
Follow AAA (Arrange, Act, Assert)
Structure each test body in three beats — set up inputs (Arrange), call the thing under test (Act), then assert on the result. Keep them in that order; don't interleave more setup after the act.
Atomic unit tests
Each test should verify a single behavior. The test name should tell you what's broken when it fails. Multiple assertions are fine when they all verify the same behavior.
# Good: Name tells you what's broken
def test_user_creation_sets_defaults():
user = User(name="Alice")
assert user.role == "member"
assert user.id is not None
assert user.created_at is not None
# Bad: If this fails, what behavior is broken?
def test_user():
user = User(name="Alice")
assert user.role == "member"
user.promote()
assert user.role == "admin"
assert user.can_delete_others()
Use parameterization for variations of the same concept
import pytest
@pytest.mark.parametrize("input,expected", [
("hello", "HELLO"),
("World", "WORLD"),
("", ""),
("123", "123"),
])
def test_uppercase_conversion(input, expected):
assert input.upper() == expected
Don't parameterize unrelated behaviors — if the test logic differs, write separate tests.
Project-Specific Rules
Imports at module level
Put ALL imports at the top of the file. Do not import inside test function bodies.
# Correct
import pytest
from myapp.service import do_work
def test_something():
assert do_work() is not None
# Wrong - no local imports
def test_something():
from myapp.service import do_work # Don't do this
...
Async tests
If the project sets asyncio_mode = "auto" in pyproject.toml, write async tests without decorators:
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 · -40 lines f7c84b01233f
- 1mo ago First seen · 215 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 3eeb917f7ba2
squid-testing-python is a skill published in the GitHub repository iusztinpaul/squid (210 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,119 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
refactor
Refactors code for quality and maintainability. Triggers: refactor, clean up, restructure, improve code, modernize.
testing-patterns
Testing strategy: pyramid, AAA, mocks/fakes/stubs, flaky tests, coverage. Triggers: test, fixture, mock, stub, e2e, TDD, Playwright, Cypress, flaky, coverage, property-based.
unit-test
A Go testing workflow for writing unit tests: small tests that check individual functions or components. It supports table-driven cases, where many inputs and expected results are organised in one test, and subtests.
fuzzing-test
A Go testing guide for generating fuzz tests, which repeatedly try varied inputs to find crashes and unexpected behavior. It first checks whether the code is suitable for fuzzing.
test-quality-analysis
Analyze test code quality to detect coverage-only tests, test smells, and low-value assertions. Use when asked to "analyze test quality", "find coverage-only tests", "audit our tests", "are these tests valuable", "find test smells", or "which tests should we delete". Scores tests 1-5 on real value and produces…
testing-strategies
Systematic testing for confidence without over-testing — the right test at the right level.