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/mturac/everything-openai-codex/tdd-workflownpx skills add mturac/everything-openai-codex --skill tdd-workflowgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mturac/everything-openai-codexWrote 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/mturac/everything-openai-codex/tdd-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mturac/everything-openai-codex/tdd-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mturac/everything-openai-codex/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 | $0.00043 | $0.02431 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.01215 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00486 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00243 |
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 4d 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to tdd-workflow — 12 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 410 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test-Driven Development Workflow
This skill ensures all code development follows TDD principles with comprehensive test coverage.
When to Activate
- Writing new features or functionality
- Fixing bugs or issues
- Refactoring existing code
- Adding API endpoints
- Creating new components
Core Principles
1. Tests BEFORE Code
ALWAYS write tests first, then implement code to make tests pass.
2. Coverage Requirements
- Minimum 80% coverage (unit + integration + E2E)
- All edge cases covered
- Error scenarios tested
- Boundary conditions verified
3. Test Types
Unit Tests
- Individual functions and utilities
- Component logic
- Pure functions
- Helpers and utilities
Integration Tests
- API endpoints
- Database operations
- Service interactions
- External API calls
E2E Tests (Playwright)
- Critical user flows
- Complete workflows
- Browser automation
- UI interactions
TDD Workflow Steps
Step 1: Write User Journeys
As a [role], I want to [action], so that [benefit]
Example:
As a user, I want to search for markets semantically,
so that I can find relevant markets even without exact keywords.
Step 2: Generate Test Cases
For each user journey, create comprehensive test cases:
describe('Semantic Search', () => {
it('returns relevant markets for query', async () => {
// Test implementation
})
it('handles empty query gracefully', async () => {
// Test edge case
})
it('falls back to substring search when Redis unavailable', async () => {
// Test fallback behavior
})
it('sorts results by similarity score', async () => {
// Test sorting logic
})
})
Step 3: Run Tests (They Should Fail)
npm test
# Tests should fail - we haven't implemented yet
Step 4: Implement Code
Write minimal code to make tests pass:
// Implementation guided by tests
export async function searchMarkets(query: string) {
// Implementation here
}
Step 5: Run Tests Again
npm test
# Tests should now pass
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 410 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 27cfe7148aeb
tdd-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository mturac/everything-openai-codex (89 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 2,431 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to tdd-workflow, differing in 12 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
architecture-diagram
Dark-themed SVG architecture/cloud/infra diagrams as HTML.
browser_cdp
通过 Chrome DevTools Protocol (CDP) 连接已运行的浏览器,或扫描本机 CDP 端口,用于远程调试与多工具共享浏览器实例。.
validate-harness
Release-readiness umbrella check for a scaffolded harness — runs doctor, witness verify, hardcoded-path scan, MCP server config, and GCP Secret Manager validation in one shot. Exits non-zero if any sub-check fails.
harness-engineering-lifecycle
Design, implement, and integrate generalized validation harnesses across a producer-consumer boundary after a local harness contract exists. Use when refactoring custom validation CLIs/MCPs for large polyrepos, extending Steward across sibling repos, or deploying a local tool to a consumer project for dogfooding and…
debug
Interactive debugging workflow with hypothesis-driven probe loop. Use when: unknown bugs, script errors, silent failures, troubleshooting. Not for: known bugs (use bug-fix), GitHub issue analysis (use issue-analyze), code understanding (use code-explore). Output: debug report with probe journal + root cause + fix.
deep-review
Parallel competency-based code review. Launches independent Agent reviewers per competency (security, performance, architecture, database, concurrency, error-handling, frontend, testing), each with a focused checklist and isolated context. Synthesizes findings into unified report with FIX/DEFER/ACCEPT triage. Use…