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/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/test-driven-developmentnpx skills add naimkatiman/continuous-improvement --skill test-driven-developmentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/naimkatiman/continuous-improvementWrote 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/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/test-driven-development)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/test-driven-development"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/naimkatiman/continuous-improvement/test-driven-development.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 | $0.00050 | $0.03393 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00025 | $0.01697 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00679 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00339 |
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 yesterday.
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
84% identical to test-driven-development — 19 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 — 384 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test-Driven Development
Overview
Write a failing test before writing the code that makes it pass. For bug fixes, reproduce the bug with a test before attempting a fix. Tests are proof — "seems right" is not done. A codebase with good tests is an AI agent's superpower; a codebase without tests is a liability.
When to Use
- Implementing any new logic or behavior
- Fixing any bug (the Prove-It Pattern)
- Modifying existing functionality
- Adding edge case handling
- Any change that could break existing behavior
When NOT to use: Pure configuration changes, documentation updates, or static content changes that have no behavioral impact.
Related: For browser-based changes, combine TDD with runtime verification using Chrome DevTools MCP — see the Browser Testing section below.
The TDD Cycle
RED GREEN REFACTOR
Write a test Write minimal code Clean up the
that fails ──→ to make it pass ──→ implementation ──→ (repeat)
│ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼
Test FAILS Test PASSES Tests still PASS
Step 1: RED — Write a Failing Test
Write the test first. It must fail. A test that passes immediately proves nothing.
// RED: This test fails because createTask doesn't exist yet
describe('TaskService', () => {
it('creates a task with title and default status', async () => {
const task = await taskService.createTask({ title: 'Buy groceries' });
expect(task.id).toBeDefined();
expect(task.title).toBe('Buy groceries');
expect(task.status).toBe('pending');
expect(task.createdAt).toBeInstanceOf(Date);
});
});
Step 2: GREEN — Make It Pass
Write the minimum code to make the test pass. Don't over-engineer:
// GREEN: Minimal implementation
export async function createTask(input: { title: string }): Promise<Task> {
const task = {
id: generateId(),
title: input.title,
status: 'pending' as const,
createdAt: new Date(),
};
await db.tasks.insert(task);
return task;
}
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.
- yesterday First seen · 384 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A 6c60e193d77a
test-driven-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository naimkatiman/continuous-improvement (7 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 3,393 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 84% identical to test-driven-development, differing in 19 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
improving-tests
Improve test design, speed, and coverage with behavior-focused tests, useful seams, characterization tests, TDD, and test refactoring. Use when improving tests, optimizing slow suites, adding coverage, refactoring brittle tests, removing test waste, or working test-first. NOT for fixing production bugs (use…
tdd
Test-driven development — the red-green-refactor discipline for code that's correct by design, not by accident. INVOKE PROACTIVELY whenever writing or changing code, fixing a bug, adding or structuring tests, or choosing what to mock — even when nobody says "TDD" or "tests". (Tests are code held to…
testing-go
Writes tests following TDD (using go test, testify, and rapid) best practices. Use when writing unit tests, integration tests, or table-driven tests in Go.
testing-tdd
Writes tests following TDD Red-Green-Refactor cycle. Language-agnostic methodology with Arrange-Act-Assert structure. Use when implementing features test-first.
eval-authoring
This skill should be used when the user mentions "llm eval", "evaluation", "promptfoo", "deepeval", "regression test", "llm judge", "golden dataset", "eval suite", "test a prompt", or wants to prove a prompt/model change improved rather than regressed behavior. It provides a standardized methodology for authoring…
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.