test-driven-development

A test-first coding practice called test-driven development, or TDD. You write a failing test, add the smallest code that passes it, then improve the code without changing its behavior.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it whenever you add a feature, fix a bug, refactor code, or change behavior by following the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle.
Why use it?
It makes the intended behavior explicit before implementation and helps catch regressions during new features, fixes, refactoring, and behavior changes.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/mateaix/mateclaw/test-driven-development
Any agent
npx skills add mateaix/mateclaw --skill test-driven-development
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mateaix/mateclaw

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 20 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,231 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00020 $0.02231
Opus 5 $0.00010 $0.01115
Sonnet 5 $0.00004 $0.00446
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00223

Measured 2d ago against content hash 27dc3e171635, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

test-driven-development 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

3 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:

mateclaw-server/src/main/resources/skills/test-driven-development/SKILL.md · 343 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 343 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Test-Driven Development (TDD)

Overview

Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.

Core principle: If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.

Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.

When to Use

Always:

  • New features
  • Bug fixes
  • Refactoring
  • Behavior changes

Exceptions (ask the user first):

  • Throwaway prototypes
  • Generated code
  • Configuration files

Thinking "skip TDD just this once"? Stop. That's rationalization.

The Iron Law

NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST

Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.

No exceptions:

  • Don't keep it as "reference"
  • Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
  • Don't look at it
  • Delete means delete

Implement fresh from tests. Period.

Red-Green-Refactor Cycle

RED — Write Failing Test

Write one minimal test showing what should happen.

Good test:

def test_retries_failed_operations_3_times():
    attempts = 0
    def operation():
        nonlocal attempts
        attempts += 1
        if attempts < 3:
            raise Exception('fail')
        return 'success'

    result = retry_operation(operation)

    assert result == 'success'
    assert attempts == 3

Clear name, tests real behavior, one thing.

Bad test:

def test_retry_works():
    mock = MagicMock()
    mock.side_effect = [Exception(), Exception(), 'success']
    result = retry_operation(mock)
    assert result == 'success'  # What about retry count? Timing?

Vague name, tests mock not real code.

Requirements:

  • One behavior per test
  • Clear descriptive name ("and" in name? Split it)
  • Real code, not mocks (unless truly unavoidable)
  • Name describes behavior, not implementation

Verify RED — Watch It Fail

MANDATORY. Never skip.

# Use terminal tool to run the specific test
pytest tests/test_feature.py::test_specific_behavior -v

Confirm:

  • Test fails (not errors from typos)
  • Failure message is expected
  • Fails because the feature is missing

Read the full file on GitHub · 343 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 343 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 27dc3e171635

Subscribe to this mod's changes

test-driven-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository mateaix/mateclaw (1,061 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 2,231 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.