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 parisgroup-ai/imersao-ia-setup --skill coverage-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/parisgroup-ai/imersao-ia-setupWrote 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/parisgroup-ai/imersao-ia-setup/coverage-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/parisgroup-ai/imersao-ia-setup/coverage-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/parisgroup-ai/imersao-ia-setup/coverage-check/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/parisgroup-ai/imersao-ia-setup/coverage-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/parisgroup-ai/imersao-ia-setup/coverage-check.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 | $0.00056 | $0.01686 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00843 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00337 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00169 |
Grade A, and why
coverage-check 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 11d 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 — 237 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
coverage-check
Validate coverage against configured thresholds and identify gaps in critical files.
Commands
/coverage-check # Validate last snapshot against config
/coverage-check --strict # Fail on any critical gap
/coverage-check --pr # Compare current branch vs main
Execution Flow
1. Load Configuration
cat coverage-config.json
Extract:
thresholds.global- Global minimums (lines, branches, functions)thresholds.<module>- Module-specific thresholdscriticalPaths- Glob patterns for critical filescriticalFiles- Explicit critical files listcriticalMinCoverage- Minimum for critical files (default 90%)
2. Load Latest Snapshot
tail -1 .coverage-history/snapshots.jsonl
Parse JSON to get current coverage metrics for each stack.
If no snapshot exists, run /coverage-run first.
3. Validate Global Thresholds
For each metric in thresholds.global:
global_check:
lines:
actual: <from vitest snapshot>
threshold: <from config>
status: PASS | FAIL
branches:
actual: <from vitest snapshot>
threshold: <from config>
status: PASS | FAIL
functions:
actual: <from vitest snapshot>
threshold: <from config>
status: PASS | FAIL
4. Validate Module Thresholds
For each module in thresholds (except "global"):
# Get module-specific coverage from detailed report
cat coverage/coverage-final.json | jq '[to_entries[] | select(.key | contains("packages/api"))] |
map(.value.s | to_entries | map(if .value > 0 then 1 else 0 end) | add / length * 100) | add / length'
5. Identify Critical Gaps
By Convention (criticalPaths):
For each pattern in criticalPaths:
# Find matching files
find . -path "**/services/**" -name "*.ts" -not -path "**/node_modules/**" -not -path "**/*.test.ts"
By Explicit List (criticalFiles):
Check each file in the criticalFiles array.
For each critical file found:
- Look up coverage in
coverage/coverage-final.json - Calculate statement coverage percentage
- Compare against
criticalMinCoverage(90%) - If below threshold, extract uncovered line numbers
- Add to gaps list with risk assessment
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 237 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 267d710b4dfb
coverage-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository parisgroup-ai/imersao-ia-setup (1 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 1,686 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
improve-code-quality
Guided journey from a working-but-untested vibe-coded prototype to a production-ready product with tests, clean structure, a business-rules boundary, and resilience at scale. Orchestrates nine skills phase by phase - working-with-legacy-code, clean-code, refactoring-patterns, software-design-philosophy…
working-with-legacy-code
Safely change and test untested codebases using Feathers' "Working Effectively with Legacy Code". Use when the user mentions "legacy code", "no tests", "untested codebase", "how do I test this", "seams", "characterization tests", "golden master", "sprout method", "afraid to change this code", "monster method"…
browser-validator
Automatically validate implementations in real browsers after code is written or when user says "test this", "test what you built in the browser", "check it in a real browser", or "validate at the breakpoints". Uses Chrome DevTools MCP to test responsive breakpoints (320px, 768px, 1024px), check accessibility…
test-scaffolding
Automatically generate test scaffolding when user writes new code without tests or mentions needing tests. Supports unit, integration, e2e, and data tests for PHP and JavaScript. Invoke when user mentions "tests", "testing", "coverage", "write tests", or shows new untested code.
coverage-analyzer
Automatically analyze test coverage when user asks which code is tested, mentions coverage gaps, or shows code asking about testing. Identifies untested code paths and suggests test additions. Invoke when user asks "what's not tested?", "coverage", "untested code", or "which tests are missing?".
test-plan-generator
Automatically generate comprehensive QA test plans when user mentions testing requirements, QA needs, or asks what should be tested. Analyzes code changes and features to create structured test scenarios. Invoke when user mentions "test plan", "QA", "what to test", "testing requirements", or "test scenarios".