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 Plazmodium/odin-workflow --skill unit-tests-sddgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Plazmodium/odin-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/plazmodium/odin-workflow/unit-tests-sdd)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/plazmodium/odin-workflow/unit-tests-sdd"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/plazmodium/odin-workflow/unit-tests-sdd.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 | $0.00036 | $0.00701 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00351 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00140 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
unit-tests-sdd 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 6d 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 — 84 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Unit Test Generation Protocol
Use this skill whenever Builder changes production code. Tests are not optional.
Required Outcome
- Add or update unit tests for every code-changing task.
- Cover acceptance criteria, edge cases, happy paths, and failure paths.
- Run the repo-native test command and lint/type checks relevant to tests.
- Stop and escalate if tests cannot be made green without changing production code in ways the spec did not authorize.
Hard Guardrails
- Never skip tests for code changes.
- Never modify production code only to make a bad test pass.
- Never delete or weaken an existing passing test just to get green.
- Never use
any,@ts-ignore, or@ts-expect-erroras shortcuts in tests. - Never use vacuous assertions like
expect(true).toBe(true). - Never rely on snapshots as the main proof of behavior.
- Never mock the module under test; mock dependencies only.
- Never leave
.only,.skip,console.log,debugger, or sleep-style delays in committed tests.
Build Workflow
- Read the source file fully before writing tests.
- Identify exports, branches, async behavior, and error paths.
- Add or update colocated test files following repo conventions.
- Use clear
describe/itnames tied to observable behavior. - Follow Arrange / Act / Assert in each non-trivial test.
- Run the repo-native test command with coverage.
- Run the repo-native lint command if tests or linted files changed.
- If coverage is below the project hard gate, add tests or escalate.
Coverage Expectations
- Meet the project's hard coverage gates at minimum.
- Aim for near-complete coverage on the changed unit.
- Cover both success and failure branches.
- Document genuine coverage gaps explicitly; do not hide them with meaningless tests.
Assertion Rules
- Prefer exact assertions over truthy/falsy checks.
- Assert outputs, visible UI, callback args, and thrown/rejected errors.
- Avoid implementation-detail assertions on private state or internals.
- For mocks, prefer argument assertions such as
toHaveBeenCalledWith(...).
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 84 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A f11145dba64c
unit-tests-sdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository Plazmodium/odin-workflow (0 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 701 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-01.
Other skills, from other repositories
api-testing
Testing patterns for MCP tool/resource handlers using createMockContext and Vitest. Covers mock context options, handler testing, McpError assertions, format testing, Vitest config setup, and test isolation conventions.
api-testing
Testing patterns for MCP tool/resource handlers using createMockContext and Vitest. Covers mock context options, handler testing, McpError assertions, format testing, Vitest config setup, and test isolation conventions.
api-testing
Testing patterns for MCP tool/resource handlers using createMockContext and Vitest. Covers mock context options, handler testing, McpError assertions, format testing, Vitest config setup, and test isolation conventions.
api-testing
Testing patterns for MCP tool/resource handlers using createMockContext and Vitest. Covers mock context options, handler testing, McpError assertions, format testing, Vitest config setup, and test isolation conventions.
api-testing
Testing patterns for MCP tool/resource handlers using createMockContext and Vitest. Covers mock context options, handler testing, McpError assertions, format testing, Vitest config setup, and test isolation conventions.
add-test
Scaffold a test file for an existing tool, resource, or service. Use when the user asks to add tests, improve coverage, or when a definition exists without a matching test file.