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 lexler/skill-factory --skill approval-testsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lexler/skill-factoryWrote 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/lexler/skill-factory/approval-tests)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lexler/skill-factory/approval-tests"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lexler/skill-factory/approval-tests.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00048 | $0.01033 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00517 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00207 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
approval-tests 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 8d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- approval-tests — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 96 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
STARTER_CHARACTER = 📸
Approval Tests
Philosophy
"A picture's worth 1000 assertions."
Approval tests verify complex output by comparing against a saved "golden master" file instead of writing individual assertions. You capture the output once, review it, approve it, and future runs compare against that approved snapshot.
You don't need to know the expected output upfront. Run the code, see what it produces, decide if it's correct. Approval is a judgment - you're confirming this is what the code should produce. Whoever writes the code reviews and approves.
Use approval tests when:
- Output is complex - instead of 20 assertions, one approval captures everything
- Characterizing legacy code - snapshot behavior, then refactor safely
- Combinatorial testing - test all input combinations in one approval
- Assertions would be tedious or brittle
Use assertions when:
- Simple values or specific edge cases
- Non-deterministic output that can't be scrubbed
Core Workflow
1. Write test with verify(result)
2. Run test → FAILS (no .approved file yet)
3. Creates: TestName.approved.txt (empty) + TestName.received.txt (actual output)
4. Review .received file - is this correct?
5. YES → rename/copy .received to .approved
6. Run test again → PASSES
7. Commit .approved file to version control
File naming convention:
{TestClass}.{test_method}.approved.txt ← commit this
{TestClass}.{test_method}.received.txt ← gitignore this
Critical rules:
.approvedfiles ARE your test expectations - commit them.receivedfiles are temporary - add*.received.*to .gitignore- Never edit
.approvedfiles by hand - always generate via test
When a test fails, a diff tool opens showing approved vs received. This is how you review changes. Reporters configure which diff tool to use.
Core API Pattern
All languages follow the same pattern:
verify(result) # Basic string/object verification
verify_as_json(object) # Objects as formatted JSON
verify_all(header, items) # Collections with labels
verify_all_combinations(fn, inputs) # All input combinations
What ships with it
24 files 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.
- java.md 3.6 KB
- links.md 2.1 KB
- nodejs.md 2.6 KB
- python.md 2.9 KB
- references/java/advanced.md 5.8 KB
- references/java/api.md 5.1 KB
- references/java/inline.md 2.6 KB
- references/java/logging.md 3.5 KB
- references/java/reporters.md 3.2 KB
- references/java/scrubbers.md 4.7 KB
- references/java/setup.md 3.2 KB
- references/nodejs/api.md 3.9 KB
- references/nodejs/inline.md 1.2 KB
- references/nodejs/reporters.md 1.2 KB
- references/nodejs/scrubbers.md 4.2 KB
- references/nodejs/setup.md 2.6 KB
- references/python/api.md 4.4 KB
- references/python/combinations.md 3.6 KB
- references/python/inline.md 3.1 KB
- references/python/logging.md 3.2 KB
- references/python/patterns.md 4.2 KB
- references/python/reporters.md 1.9 KB
- references/python/scrubbers.md 4.3 KB
- references/python/setup.md 3.4 KB
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 96 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A c54945d5472a
approval-tests is a skill published in the GitHub repository lexler/skill-factory (234 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 1,033 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
research-engineer
An uncompromising Academic Research Engineer. Operates with absolute scientific rigor, objective criticism, and zero flair. Focuses on theoretical correctness, formal verification, and optimal implementation across any required technology.
tika-eval-compare
Compare extracts from two Tika builds over a corpus to detect regressions in content, encoding, exceptions, and embedded-document handling. Use for "compare before/after extracts", "eval this change against the corpus".
neuron-evaluation-engineer
Create and run AI evaluations with datasets, assertions, and output drivers in Neuron AI. Use this skill whenever the user mentions evaluation, testing AI systems, creating evaluators, dataset-driven testing, assertion-based validation, or wants to measure AI system performance. Also trigger for tasks involving…
jetson-validate-image
Use after jetson-flash-image to run static BSP checks, on-target smoke/regression tests on a flashed DUT, or both. Not for build or flash steps. Triggers: validate bsp, on-target validation.
atmos-validation
Validate Atmos projects, components, arbitrary JSON Schema inputs, EditorConfig, and GitHub Actions; use affected-file selection and native CI annotations.
skill-benchmark
Benchmark AI skill effectiveness by measuring implementation quality against legacy constraints.