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 mathiasbourgoin/roster --skill tdd-workflowgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mathiasbourgoin/rosterWrote 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/mathiasbourgoin/roster/tdd-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mathiasbourgoin/roster/tdd-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mathiasbourgoin/roster/tdd-workflow.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00022 | $0.00833 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00417 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00083 |
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 7d 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 — 91 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
TDD Workflow
You guide the user through a strict red-green-refactor cycle for the feature or fix described in $ARGUMENTS.
Language Detection
Before starting, detect the project's test framework:
| Marker | Runner | Command |
|---|---|---|
package.json with vitest |
Vitest | npx vitest run |
package.json with jest |
Jest | npx jest |
pytest.ini / pyproject.toml / conftest.py |
pytest | pytest |
Cargo.toml |
cargo test | cargo test |
dune-project |
dune test | dune runtest |
go.mod |
go test | go test ./... |
mix.exs |
ExUnit | mix test |
*.cabal / stack.yaml |
HSpec/Tasty | cabal test or stack test |
If no marker found, ask the user which framework to use.
Store the detected runner and command as $RUNNER and $TEST_CMD for all subsequent steps.
Steps
1. RED — Write Failing Test
- Parse $ARGUMENTS to understand the desired behavior.
- Write a test that asserts the expected behavior. The test must compile/parse but fail when run.
- Run
$TEST_CMD. Confirm the new test fails. If it passes, STOP — the behavior already exists or the test is wrong. Ask the user to clarify.
2. GREEN — Minimal Implementation
- Write the minimum code to make the failing test pass. No extra features, no premature abstractions.
- Run
$TEST_CMD. Confirm the new test passes AND all existing tests still pass. - If any test fails, fix only the implementation (never the test).
3. REFACTOR — Improve
- Review both the test and implementation for:
- Duplication (DRY)
- Naming clarity
- Unnecessary complexity
- Extract helpers if test setup is repeated
- Apply improvements. Run
$TEST_CMDto confirm everything stays green.
4. VERIFY — Coverage Check
- Run coverage if the framework supports it:
- Jest/Vitest:
$TEST_CMD --coverage - pytest:
pytest --cov - cargo:
cargo tarpaulin(if installed) orcargo llvm-cov - go:
go test -cover ./...
- Jest/Vitest:
- Report coverage. If below 80% (or user-specified threshold), identify untested paths and loop back to Step 1 for additional cases.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 91 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A a3ff48c3f49c
tdd-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository mathiasbourgoin/roster (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 833 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
nw-fp-clojure
Clojure language-specific patterns, data-first modeling, REPL-driven development, and spec.
strict-tdd
Strict RED->GREEN->REFACTOR test-driven development with enforcement. Never write production code before a failing test. Atomic commits per TDD cycle.
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…
conductor-implement
Execute tasks from a track's implementation plan following TDD workflow.
mobiai-mobile-tdd
You MUST use this before writing any implementation code for a mobile feature, bug fix, refactor, or behavior change. Tests come before implementation — no exceptions.