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 nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow --skill test-strategygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflowWrote 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/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/test-strategy)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/test-strategy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/test-strategy/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/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/test-strategy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/test-strategy.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 | $0.00024 | $0.01244 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00498 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00249 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00124 |
Grade A, and why
test-strategy 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 20d 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 — 96 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an expert QA engineer and test architect tasked with generating a comprehensive test plan based on the project's features and RFCs.
Create a structured test strategy that ensures thorough coverage of all implemented functionality. The test plan should be practical, prioritized, and aligned with the RFC implementation sequence.
Inputs
- PRD.md for the Product Type section
- FEATURES.md for feature requirements
- RFCs (all or specific ones being tested)
- RULES.md for testing standards
- Existing codebase (if available)
WHEN ARTIFACTS CONFLICT
Order of authority: PRD.md > FEATURES.md > RULES.md > RFCs > generated plans. Where this prompt's generic guidance conflicts with RULES.md, RULES.md wins -- it was written for this project and this prompt was not. Never resolve a contradiction between two artifacts silently: state it, say which one you followed and why, and flag the other for correction.
STEP 0: ESTABLISH THE BASELINE
Before planning anything, run the existing test suite and report the actual baseline: how many tests exist, which files they live in, and what passes or fails. Paste the real output.
Throughout the plan, distinguish tests that ALREADY EXIST from tests you are PROPOSING. Without that split a generated plan reads as if it describes reality, and its status column is guesswork dressed as fact.
If no suite exists yet, or you cannot execute commands in this environment, say so explicitly rather than assuming coverage.
PRODUCT TYPE
Read the Product Type section of PRD.md and apply only the checks that fit that type; state which checks you skipped and why. Skipping must be visible, never silent. If PRD.md has no such section, classify the product yourself (web app · mobile app · library/SDK · CLI · service/API · data pipeline · game), say that you did, and recommend running /verify-prd so the classification is recorded once for every later step.
Test Plan Sections
Replace sections that do not fit the product type rather than padding them. For a library of pure functions, most of sections 2-6 do not apply; the useful equivalents are numeric correctness, immutability of caller-owned data, determinism, API surface, bundle size, and supply chain.
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.
- 20d ago First seen · 96 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A ad2dacd816e4
test-strategy is a skill published in the GitHub repository nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow (305 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 1,244 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-10-02.
Other skills, from other repositories
browser-use
Direct browser control via CDP for web interaction: automation, scraping, testing, screenshots, and site/app work. Also covers hosted cloud browsers for AI agents: the browser-use Python library (Browser(usecloud=True)), Playwright, Puppeteer or any CDP client.
qa
QA-test a website or web app and return a 1-5 quality score (5 = flawless, 1 = broken) with evidence. Use when the user wants to test, QA, evaluate, score, or "check how good" a site, page, flow, or app — including a local dev server (e.g. "qa test localhost:5173", "does the checkout work?", "rate this landing page").…
patrol-e2e-testing
Use when writing E2E/integration tests, testing native interactions like permissions or system dialogs, capturing UI regressions, or validating cross-platform behavior (Patrol 4.x).
testing
Use when writing or reviewing Flutter/Dart tests (unit, widget, golden), fixing flaky tests, adding coverage, or choosing between unit and widget tests.
mockito
Use when generating mocks, stubbing methods, verifying interactions, capturing arguments, or choosing between mocks, fakes, and real objects (Mockito).
mocktail
Use when creating mocks, stubbing methods, verifying interactions, registering fallback values, or choosing between mocks, fakes, and real objects (Mocktail).