property-testing-fit-assessment

property-testing-fit-assessment is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from OutlineDriven/odin-claude-plugin. It costs 62 tokens per session (1,642 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A decision guide for judging whether property-based testing fits a particular code path and, if so, which rule, input strategy, and library to use. Property-based testing checks broad behavior rules across generated inputs.

In plain words
What is it for?
Assessing a function, module, or contract before choosing a property-based testing approach.
Why use it?
It avoids adopting generated tests where ordinary examples are better, and helps choose a meaningful rule instead of a shallow one.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for Claude Code and Codex: shipped in a Claude Code plugin, but also agents/openai.yaml present.

Part of the odin-code-advanced plugin — 30 skills shipped together

Good fit Assessing a function, module, or contract before choosing a property-based testing approach.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/outlinedriven/odin-claude-plugin/property-testing-fit-assessment
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add OutlineDriven/odin-claude-plugin --skill property-testing-fit-assessment
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/OutlineDriven/odin-claude-plugin

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Or install odin-code-advanced, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 30 skills.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for property-testing-fit-assessment

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/outlinedriven/odin-claude-plugin/property-testing-fit-assessment/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/outlinedriven/odin-claude-plugin/property-testing-fit-assessment)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/outlinedriven/odin-claude-plugin/property-testing-fit-assessment"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/outlinedriven/odin-claude-plugin/property-testing-fit-assessment/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for property-testing-fit-assessment

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/outlinedriven/odin-claude-plugin/property-testing-fit-assessment"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/outlinedriven/odin-claude-plugin/property-testing-fit-assessment.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 62 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,642 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00062 $0.01642
Opus 5 $0.00031 $0.00821
Sonnet 5 $0.00012 $0.00328
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00164

Measured 8d ago against content hash 1f8bbaa09d0c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

property-testing-fit-assessment 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 8d 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.

plugins/odin-code-advanced/skills/property-testing-fit-assessment/SKILL.md · 44 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 44 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Property testing fit assessment

Contract

Field Bound contract
Trigger The user asks whether property-based testing fits a code path, which property and library to choose, or whether an existing design exposes a meaningful property.
Authority Read-only: inspect source, tests, and manifests. Never edit files, change VCS state, install dependencies, or perform package-manager or network mutations.
Side effect Chat output only: one fit assessment. Dependency adoption and any production refactor remain the user's decisions; offer them at most once and never carry them out.
Done The response names a grounded property, domain, strategy seam, and existing-or-proposed library with consent boundaries, or explains why example tests are the better method.

Inputs

  • The code path in question (required). Without it there is nothing to assess.
  • Tests covering that path (expected; their absence is assessment evidence, not a blocker).
  • The dependency manifest and test files of the enclosing project (required for the library verdict; they reveal an existing PBT library).
  • Optional: the target language or stack when not evident from the code, and any written invariants or specifications the user wants honored.

Procedure

  1. Bound the assessment to the named code path and its direct tests. Read the implementation and every test that exercises it. Assess additional paths only when the user names them; never sweep the module. Done when: the assessment is bounded to the named path and its direct tests are read.
  2. Detect an existing PBT library before proposing anything. Search tests and manifests for hypothesis, fast-check, proptest, quickcheck, pgregory.net/rapid, net.jqwik, ScalaCheck, FsCheck, StreamData, test.check, PropCheck, Kotest, RapidCheck, SwiftCheck, echidna_, and invariant_. A hit names the recommendation and forbids proposing a second library. Done when: an existing PBT library is detected or confirmed absent.
  3. Read the algebraic shape of the code against the catalog: roundtrip decode(encode(x)) == x; inverse f(g(x)) == x; oracle new(x) == reference(x); idempotence f(f(x)) == f(x); invariant holding before and after a transformation; easy-to-verify is_sorted(sort(x)); commutativity f(a, b) == f(b, a); associativity f(f(a, b), c) == f(a, f(b, c)); identity f(x, e) == x. Done when: the algebraic shape is read against the catalog.
  4. Select the strongest property the code supports on the ordering no crash → type preservation → invariant → idempotence → roundtrip / oracle. "No crash" alone does not justify a library. Before settling for it, decide whether the shape is missing or merely buried: a calculation wrapped in I/O, a string built by concatenation, an in-place mutation, and a value read from a global or the environment each hold a property with no seam to assert it through. In the buried case, name exactly one rearrangement — extract the pure core, add the inverse, split a structured value from its renderer, return a value instead of mutating, or inject the bound as a parameter — state the property it unlocks, and mark it as the user's production-code decision. Never propose refactoring as part of the assessment. Done when: the strongest property is selected, or the shape is identified as buried with one rearrangement named as the user's decision.
  5. Vacuity-check the candidate before naming it. Reject a tautology that restates the implementation (add(a, b) == a + b); no bug it shares with the code can fail it. f(x) == f(x) is a genuine determinism property only when purity is not obvious — serializers over unordered containers, hashing, anything reading the clock. Reject an assume() filter that discards nearly every generated input or is self-contradictory; the valid domain must be produced by the strategy itself, and the verdict must name that strategy as the domain. For Solidity: type bounds are compiler guarantees, not properties (uint256 is never negative; address(this).balance >= 0 is always true); a property over state no call sequence can reach is vacuous until coverage output shows otherwise. Done when: the candidate passes vacuity-check or is rejected with the specific reason.
  6. Name the library. An existing one from step 2 wins outright. Otherwise use the language default: Python Hypothesis; TypeScript or JavaScript fast-check; Rust proptest; Go rapid; Java jqwik; Scala ScalaCheck; C# FsCheck; Elixir StreamData; Haskell QuickCheck; Clojure test.check; Ruby PropCheck; Kotlin Kotest; C++ RapidCheck; Swift SwiftCheck only after checking it is still maintained. For EVM contracts: Echidna by default, Medusa when parallel or coverage-guided execution matters; state whether the property is property mode (a bool function that must never become false) or assertion mode (an assert inside a fuzzer-callable function), chosen by where the property lives. Done when: the library is named (existing or language default).
  7. Deliver the verdict. Recommend PBT when steps 3–6 produced a non-vacuous property stronger than "no crash": state the property, domain, strategy seam, and library; when a new dependency or the step-4 refactor is needed, offer it once bound to that specific property and accept either answer as final. Decline when the only reachable property is "no crash" after the buried-shape check, or the code has no computable relation to constrain: example tests are the better method, and saying so plainly is a correct outcome. Never implement either path. Done when: the verdict is delivered (recommend with property/domain/seam/library, or decline with reason).

Read the full file on GitHub · 44 lines

Files

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.

Changes

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.

  1. 8d ago First seen · 44 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A 1f8bbaa09d0c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

property-testing-fit-assessment is a skill published in the GitHub repository OutlineDriven/odin-claude-plugin (36 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 1,642 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-04.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

local-ai-agents

Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…

microsoft/ai-agents-for-beginners · 200 tokens

next-cache-components-adoption

Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…

vercel/next.js · 95 tokens

chat-pet-sprite-creation

Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens

insight-error-page

Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…

vercel/next.js · 83 tokens