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 agentmods add skills/jpm1118/threadwork/testing-anti-patternsnpx skills add JPM1118/Threadwork --skill testing-anti-patternsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JPM1118/ThreadworkWhat 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 | $0.00044 | $0.01023 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00511 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00205 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00102 |
Grade A, and why
testing-anti-patterns 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 2d 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.
Testing Anti-Patterns
Overview
Tests must verify real behavior, not mock behavior. Mocks are a means to isolate, not the thing being tested.
Core principle: Test what the code does, not what the mocks do.
Following strict TDD prevents these anti-patterns.
The Iron Laws
1. NEVER test mock behavior
2. NEVER add test-only methods to production classes
3. NEVER mock without understanding dependencies
Anti-Pattern 1: Testing Mock Behavior
The violation:
// BAD: Testing that the mock exists
test('renders sidebar', () => {
render(<Page />);
expect(screen.getByTestId('sidebar-mock')).toBeInTheDocument();
});
Why this is wrong:
- You're verifying the mock works, not that the component works
- Test passes when mock is present, fails when it's not
- Tells you nothing about real behavior
The fix:
// GOOD: Test real component or don't mock it
test('renders sidebar', () => {
render(<Page />); // Don't mock sidebar
expect(screen.getByRole('navigation')).toBeInTheDocument();
});
Anti-Pattern 2: Test-Only Methods in Production
The violation:
// BAD: destroy() only used in tests
class Session {
async destroy() { // Looks like production API!
await this._workspaceManager?.destroyWorkspace(this.id);
}
}
// In tests
afterEach(() => session.destroy());
Why this is wrong:
- Production class polluted with test-only code
- Dangerous if accidentally called in production
- Violates YAGNI and separation of concerns
The fix:
// GOOD: Test utilities handle test cleanup
// Session has no destroy() - it's stateless in production
// In test-utils/
export async function cleanupSession(session: Session) {
const workspace = session.getWorkspaceInfo();
if (workspace) {
await workspaceManager.destroyWorkspace(workspace.id);
}
}
// In tests
afterEach(() => cleanupSession(session));
Anti-Pattern 3: Mocking Without Understanding
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 175 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A e681a4a0cf40
testing-anti-patterns is a skill published in the GitHub repository JPM1118/Threadwork (5 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 1,023 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…