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 Nolane-x/forge-os --skill fixing-bugs-with-tddgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Nolane-x/forge-osWrote 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/nolane-x/forge-os/fixing-bugs-with-tdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nolane-x/forge-os/fixing-bugs-with-tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nolane-x/forge-os/fixing-bugs-with-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/nolane-x/forge-os/fixing-bugs-with-tdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nolane-x/forge-os/fixing-bugs-with-tdd.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 | $0.00039 | $0.00195 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00097 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00039 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00019 |
Grade A, and why
fixing-bugs-with-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 9d 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.
What it actually says
Fixing Bugs With Tdd
Core principle
Fixing bugs with tdd within implementation lifecycle boundaries. Deterministic checks own scope, typed preconditions, evidence, and coverage; the agent performs only the domain judgment that cannot be encoded safely.
Do not activate when
- the requested outcome does not require fixing bugs with tdd within implementation lifecycle boundaries
- the typed inputs for fixing-bugs-with-tdd are absent and another technique owns the outcome
What ships with it
9 files 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 23 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 27631710e576
fixing-bugs-with-tdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository Nolane-x/forge-os (10 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 195 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
fix
Diagnose and fix a bug in an isolated git worktree with reproduce-first, test-first methodology.
iterative-development
TDD iteration loops using Claude Code Stop hooks - runs tests after each response, feeds failures back automatically.
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-enforcement
Red-Green-Refactor TDD methodology with mandatory failing tests, minimal implementation, quality refactoring, and 80% coverage gating.
story-development
Implement user stories with test-driven development methodology.
ap-implementer
L3 executor - G4 IMPLEMENT. Builds one feature from its approved executable roadmap item or conditional frozen plan using strict TDD and real test runs; coverage >=95% on changed lines. Reports PLAN-CONFLICT rather than improvising.