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 Joaonic/agentkit --skill tdd-workflowgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Joaonic/agentkitWrote 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/joaonic/agentkit/tdd-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/joaonic/agentkit/tdd-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/joaonic/agentkit/tdd-workflow/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/joaonic/agentkit/tdd-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/joaonic/agentkit/tdd-workflow.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 | $0.01674 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00670 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00335 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00167 |
Grade A, and why
tdd-workflow 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 — 94 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
TDD Workflow (Test-Driven Development)
Quando usar (sempre)
- Mudança de comportamento (feature nova, correção de bug com regressão) — ver
04-tdd-mandatory.mdcedocs/governance/cursor/workflow/00-overview.md(test-first). - Quando existe um alvo verificável (testes) para iterar até passar.
Antes do primeiro teste
- Cumprir investigação mínima — rule
01-investigation-before-implementation.mdc; objetivos/non-objectivos; módulos e contratos impactados; evitar duplicar use cases/adapters/UI já existentes. - Se o escopo tocar
apps/*,web/*,libraries/*,infra/*: lerAGENTS.mde README do subprojeto (quando existirem) — comandos e camadas corretas (40-submodule-governance.mdc). - Ordem de fases em execução guiada:
docs/governance/cursor/workflow/02-implementation.md(investigation → TDD prep → implementation loop → …).
Fluxo TDD (disciplina)
- Escrever ou estender testes primeiro — cenários e asserts claros; nomes que documentem comportamento.
- Executar a suíte relevante e confirmar falha — não adicionar implementação “para fazer passar” antes de ver o vermelho (exceto infra mínima impossível de testar sem stubs já aceites no projeto).
- Implementar o mínimo para verde — sem alterar o contrato dos testes salvo erro de especificação já acordado com o utilizador.
- Refatorar com testes verdes (opcional mas recomendado).
- Repetir até cobrir acceptance criteria.
Regras
- Não usar mocks que substituam comportamento que ainda não existe de forma a falsificar verde — o primeiro objetivo é falha legítima.
- Não mudar testes durante implementação só para “facilitar” — se o teste estiver errado, corrigir com explícito acordo sobre especificação.
- Rodar testes após cada iteração significativa.
- Backend: integração com persistência realista → preferir Testcontainers + PostgreSQL onde o projeto já o faz (
15-database-flyway-testcontainers.mdc); não usar H2 para substituir semântica PostgreSQL em integração.
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 First seen · 94 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A ef748de1adc3
tdd-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository Joaonic/agentkit (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 1,674 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
conductor-implement
Execute tasks from a track's implementation plan following TDD workflow.
principle-test-behavior-not-implementation
Apply when you write, change, or keep a test. Assert what the code's users can observe, so that the test fails when that behavior breaks and keeps passing when only the internals change.
iterative-development
TDD iteration loops using Claude Code Stop hooks - runs tests after each response, feeds failures back automatically.
python
Python development with ruff, mypy, pytest - TDD and type safety.
tdd
This skill should be used when the user wants to implement features or fix bugs using test-driven development. Enforces the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle with vertical slicing, context isolation between test writing and implementation, human checkpoints, and auto-test feedback loops. Uses multi-agent orchestration with the…