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 omnigentx/jarvis --skill test-fixinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/omnigentx/jarvisWrote 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/omnigentx/jarvis/test-fixing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/omnigentx/jarvis/test-fixing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/omnigentx/jarvis/test-fixing.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00027 | $0.00441 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00220 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00088 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
test-fixing 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 3d 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
Test Fixing
Adapted from mhattingpete/claude-skills-marketplace.
When to Use
- Tests are failing after implementation changes
- CI/CD reports test failures
- QE reports FAIL verdict with test failures
Systematic Approach
1. Run All Tests
Run the test suite to see the full picture:
- Total number of failures
- Error types and patterns
- Affected modules/files
2. Group Errors
Group similar failures by:
- Error type: ImportError, AttributeError, AssertionError, etc.
- Module/file: Same file causing multiple failures
- Root cause: Missing deps, API changes, refactoring impacts
3. Fix in Priority Order
Infrastructure first:
- Import errors
- Missing dependencies
- Configuration issues
Then API changes: 4. Function signature changes 5. Module reorganization 6. Renamed variables/functions
Finally logic issues: 7. Assertion failures 8. Business logic bugs 9. Edge case handling
4. Fix One Group at a Time
For each group:
- Identify root cause — Read code, check recent changes
- Implement fix — Minimal, focused changes
- Run subset tests — Verify this group passes
- Move to next group — Only after current passes
5. Final Verification
After all groups fixed:
- Run complete test suite
- Verify no regressions
- Report results
Best Practices
- Fix one group at a time
- Run focused tests after each fix (
pytest tests/specific_test.py -v) - Keep changes minimal
- Don't move to next group until current passes
- Look for patterns — one fix might solve multiple failures
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 70 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 563a683ddf6c
test-fixing is a skill published in the GitHub repository omnigentx/jarvis (36 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 441 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
4-phase root cause debugging: understand bugs before fixing.
langsmith-observability
LLM observability platform for tracing, evaluation, and monitoring. Use when debugging LLM applications, evaluating model outputs against datasets, monitoring production systems, or building systematic testing pipelines for AI applications.
experimental-code-coverage-local-debugger
Runs code coverage locally via Universal Test Runner (UTR) or helper scripts, mimicking LUCI trybots. Activate when CQ tryjobs fail or underreport coverage, to test local GN/recipe repairs before uploading, or to debug hermetic crashes.
adversarial-reviewer
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
cli-e2e
Write, modify, or debug Docker-based Composio CLI end-to-end tests under ts/e2e-tests/cli, including binary invocation, fixture isolation, output assertions, and package manifests. Use for CLI E2E test suites only; use cli-command for CLI source implementation.
ios-simulator
Verify and debug native, React Native, Expo, or Flutter apps on an iOS Simulator with agent-device. Use when an agent needs to launch an app, inspect its live UI, tap, type, scroll, validate a code change, collect failure evidence, or reproduce a workflow on an iPhone or iPad Simulator.