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 NickPolyder/NP.CoPilot.Config --skill test-gap-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NickPolyder/NP.CoPilot.ConfigWrote 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/nickpolyder/np.copilot.config/test-gap-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nickpolyder/np.copilot.config/test-gap-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nickpolyder/np.copilot.config/test-gap-analysis/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/nickpolyder/np.copilot.config/test-gap-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nickpolyder/np.copilot.config/test-gap-analysis.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00040 | $0.00855 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00342 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00171 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
test-gap-analysis 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 1mo 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 — 88 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purpose
Shared policy: Follow
instructions/coordination.instructions.mdfor precedence, invocation, delegation, and handoffs. Applyinstructions/workflow.instructions.mdfor proportional work and verification.
This skill is a thin coordinator. It owns the retroactive coverage flow and the gate between auditing and generating tests, but delegates the detailed procedures to two atomic skills:
test-gap-audit— read-only discovery of untested paths, weak assertions, and missing edge cases, with a risk-prioritized gap report.test-gap-fill— generation of concrete, runnable tests for approved gaps, following project conventions.
For single-phase needs, invoke those skills directly. Use this coordinator when you want the full audit → approval → fill flow in one place.
Difference from
test-strategy:test-strategyis forward-looking (plans tests for new work). This flow is retroactive — it audits existing code that may have shipped without adequate coverage.
When to use this skill
Use this skill whenever:
- A bug shipped that "should have been caught by tests" — retroactively fill the gap.
- Before a major refactoring — ensure the safety net exists before you lean on it.
- During maintenance cycles — periodic test health check.
- The user asks to "find untested code", "improve test coverage", or "audit tests for [module]".
- After a production incident — identify what tests would have prevented it.
Do not use this skill for:
- Planning tests for new features — use
test-strategyinstead. - Running or debugging existing tests — do that directly.
- Code review — use
git-commit-reviewor thecode-revieweragent. - A pure gap report (no intent to write tests) — invoke
test-gap-auditdirectly.
Workflow
Run the two atomic skills in strict order with an approval gate between them.
Step 1: Audit (delegate to test-gap-audit)
Run the test-gap-audit skill. It selects scope, discovers branch/state/integration gaps and
test-quality smells, prioritizes findings by risk, and presents the gap report. It is read-only —
it never writes or edits tests or production code.
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · -10 lines 79344817f917
- 1mo ago First seen · 98 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 632e674c3fe6
test-gap-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository NickPolyder/NP.CoPilot.Config (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 855 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
adk-go-self-review
Review an ADK Go change the way a maintainer will — a fresh-context pass over the whole diff, five lenses (correctness and tests, scope, simplicity, style, adk-python parity), and the mutation check that proves your tests pin the change. Use before opening a PR, before any later push that changes code, and when asked…
adversarial-reviewer
Stress-test a code change for concrete correctness defects, unsafe assumptions, and failure modes. Use when the user explicitly asks for an adversarial review, a deep bug hunt, or to tear a change apart, or to check your own change before submitting it. Do not use for ordinary review, style feedback, or general…
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
semgrep-rule-variant-creator
Creates language variants of existing Semgrep rules. Use when porting a Semgrep rule to specified target languages. Takes an existing rule and target languages as input, produces independent rule+test directories for each language.
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
plugin-review
Review plugin quality with tiered checks and dependency scoping. Use for PR and pre-release audits.