pstack-claude is a set of opinionated coding-agent skills and workflows ported from Cursor to Claude Code, Codex, Pi, and other agent harnesses. It guides agents toward concise, simple, and verified code by routing goals to suitable workflows and supporting subagent tools. The catalogue entries are the project's skills, agents, hook, and plugin implementations for these agent environments.
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 michael-denyer/pstack-claude --skill tddgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/michael-denyer/pstack-claudeWrote 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/michael-denyer/pstack-claude/tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/michael-denyer/pstack-claude/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/michael-denyer/pstack-claude/tdd/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/michael-denyer/pstack-claude/tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/michael-denyer/pstack-claude/tdd.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Socket pass
- Snyk 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 | $0.00052 | $0.00652 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00261 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00130 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
tdd 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 25d 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 — 42 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
TDD Bug Fix
When fixing a bug with a clear, cheap test path, make the broken behavior executable before changing production code. The goal is a focused regression test that fails before the fix and passes after it.
Do not force a test when it would be impractical. If the available test would require broad harness setup, brittle mocks, slow end-to-end infrastructure, production-only state, vague reproduction steps, or large unrelated fixture churn, skip adding a new test and use the closest useful verification instead.
Workflow
- Understand the bug. Identify the intended behavior, current behavior, affected path, and smallest observable reproduction.
- Choose the narrowest executable check. Prefer the closest unit, component, integration, or regression test already used for that codepath. If no practical test path is obvious, do not create one from scratch just to satisfy the workflow.
- Write the failing test first. Add the smallest focused test that would have caught the bug. The test should encode intended behavior, not mirror the current implementation.
- Run the new test before fixing. Confirm it fails for the intended reason. Quote the failure content, not the assertion line: an exception, an empty result against a literal, and the predicted mismatch all print red, and only the last one proves the test measures the bug. If it passes or fails for an unrelated reason, correct the test or reproduction before editing the implementation.
- Fix the bug. Make the smallest production change that satisfies the intended behavior while preserving nearby contracts.
- Rerun the regression test. Confirm the test now passes.
If a Failing Test Is Impractical
Use the closest executable regression check instead: a targeted script, manual reproduction command, browser automation, snapshot comparison, log assertion, or focused integration check.
Prefer no new test over a bad test. A bad test is one that mostly tests mocks, encodes current implementation details, depends on timing or unrelated global state, needs expensive infrastructure for a small fix, or would be deleted immediately after proving the fix.
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.
- 25d ago Changed · -2 lines 276f883002b7
- 1mo ago Changed · -1 lines 4f4fb7f6b9a8
- 1mo ago First seen · 45 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A f5970d98aed9
tdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository michael-denyer/pstack-claude (2,976 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 652 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
workflow-patterns
Use this skill when implementing tasks according to Conductor's TDD workflow, handling phase checkpoints, managing git commits for tasks, or understanding the verification protocol.
test-audit
Audit test suites for T1-T4 violations using AST analysis, mock detection, and multi-stage synthesis. Invoke when user asks to audit tests, check test quality, find mock violations, review test effectiveness, or inspect test suites for over-mocking. Triggers automatic rewrites when quality gates fail.
blueprint
Converts an approved spec into a TDD task plan with a parallelism map (PARALLEL vs SEQUENTIAL), saved to .workspace/shared/plans/. Use after a spec is approved, before implementation.
ward
TDD engine and enforcer — red/green/refactor, one behavior at a time. Use while implementing any feature or bugfix, or to execute a specific blueprint task with TDD.
dev-tdd
TDD development with Red-Green-Refactor cycle. Use to implement a feature by writing tests BEFORE the code. Trigger automatically when the user asks for TDD, wants to write tests first, mentions "test first", or asks to implement, add, create, fix, correct code, a new feature, a bugfix, or a functionality.
tdd
Strict test-driven development (Beck-style). Use when writing new code, adding features, or fixing bugs with TDD discipline. TRIGGER when: user asks to use TDD, write tests first, or red/green/refactor. DO NOT TRIGGER when: writing tests after the fact, or user explicitly opts out of TDD.