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 agentmods add skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/tdd-workflownpx skills add phuonghx/aim-cli --skill tdd-workflowgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/phuonghx/aim-cliWrote 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/phuonghx/aim-cli/tdd-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/tdd-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/tdd-workflow.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00106 | $0.01051 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.00526 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00210 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00105 |
Grade A, and why
tdd-workflow 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 2d 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 — 122 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
TDD Workflow
In test-driven development the test comes before the code. You describe the behavior you want as an executable expectation, watch it fail, then write just enough to satisfy it. The test becomes the specification, and a passing suite becomes the proof.
The loop
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ RED write a test; run it; watch it fail │
│ ↓ │
│ GREEN write the least code that passes it │
│ ↓ │
│ REFACTOR tidy up while every test stays green│
│ ↓ │
└──── repeat for the next behavior ─────────────┘
Three constraints keep the loop honest:
- Add production code only in response to a test that is currently failing.
- Write no more of a test than it takes to show that failure.
- Write no more code than it takes to turn that test green.
RED — start with a failing test
Express what the code should do, never how it does it.
| Aim at | Example name |
|---|---|
| Core behavior | adds two positive numbers |
| Boundaries | returns zero for an empty list |
| Failure modes | raises on a negative quantity |
Ground rules: the test must fail before you write any implementation, its name should read as a sentence about behavior, and each test should pin down a single idea.
# RED — this fails because cart_total does not exist yet
def test_cart_total_sums_line_items():
cart = Cart(items=[Item(price=300), Item(price=150)])
assert cart.total() == 450
GREEN — do the minimum to pass
Write the plainest thing that turns the bar green. No speculative features, no tuning.
| Principle | What it means here |
|---|---|
| Avoid speculation | If a test does not demand it, do not build it |
| Plainest solution | The most obvious code that satisfies the assertion |
| Defer performance | Make it correct now; make it fast later, if measured |
# GREEN — just enough to satisfy the test
class Cart:
def __init__(self, items):
self.items = items
def total(self):
return sum(item.price for item in self.items)
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 122 lines · 106 tokens per session scan A 1dd05a749ef0
tdd-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository phuonghx/aim-cli (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 106 tokens to every session and 1,051 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
ai-observability-promptfoo
Testing and evaluation framework for LLM prompts and applications -- promptfooconfig.yaml, assertions, model-graded evals, red teaming, CI/CD integration, custom providers, and comparative evaluation.
autonomous-pipeline
Orchestrate the full AIDLC Autonomous Pipeline from a one-sentence requirement to a PR-ready delivery with TDD methodology. DDD drives judgment, SDD produces specs, TDD verifies delivery. Stages: Evaluate, Think, Plan, Build, Review, Test, Deliver, Reflect. Checkpoints on BLOCK or context limits. TRIGGER: "run…
fable-tdd
Drive testable behavior changes and bug fixes through disciplined red-green-refactor cycles with observable regression tests. Use when implementing new features with unit/integration tests, fixing reproducible bugs, modifying business logic, or writing test-first behavior contracts — even if the user does not…
fable-mode
Compatibility alias for the canonical get-fable coding lifecycle. Use when the user explicitly asks for Fable mode or when an existing installation invokes this legacy skill name.
orch-tdd
Use when implementing a feature via test-driven development - write a failing test first, get to green with the smallest correct change, then refactor. Enforces vertical slice shape and red-commit-hash evidence.
triage-bug
Use when triaging a bug from session evidence (evidence-capture JSONL, replay JSONL, telemetry, repo-audit) instead of from a live user description, and producing a TDD fix plan plus a docs/bugs/{slug}.md triage artifact.