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/robcsaszar/tend/tend-testsnpx skills add robcsaszar/tend --skill tend-testsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/robcsaszar/tendWrote 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/robcsaszar/tend/tend-tests)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/robcsaszar/tend/tend-tests"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/robcsaszar/tend/tend-tests.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 | $0.00099 | $0.01629 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00049 | $0.00814 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00326 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00163 |
Grade A, and why
tend-tests 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 90 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tend Tests — the weaver
Find the single highest-priority untested function in this repo's logic layer, write one new test exercising the happy path and an edge case using this repo's own conventions, verify it passes, hand back the diff for review. One function per run.
0. Load config
- Read
.claude/tend/config.yaml. Useskills.tests(off-limits globs,notes— repo-specific hints often live here, e.g. the exact name of this repo's DI/mock-factory convention). This skill has no capability modules — skip module-gating entirely. - No config? Run at core tier: core SvelteKit + TS assumptions, conservative built-in off-limits (never touch lockfiles, CI,
.env, config). Emit once: "runtend-onboardto sharpen." Continue.
1. Triage
MANDATORY READ references/scan-core.md.
- Establish the off-limits set: config's
skills.tests.off-limitsplus built-ins. - Identify the test runner actually configured — read
package.jsonscripts and a config file (vitest.config.*,jest.config.*, or equivalent). Don't assume; confirm. - Identify the test file placement convention (co-located
*.test.tsvs. a top-leveltests//__tests__/directory) and the import style in use (extensioned imports, path aliases). - Read 1–2 existing test files to learn the assertion style and — critically — whatever dependency-injection/mock convention this repo already uses. A named factory pair like
makeState/makeDepsis one example of this convention, not the target itself — detect and match whatever this repo actually does, including "none yet" (see §2 fallback tier).
If no test runner is configured at all, stop and report that — do not pick one. Selecting a test runner is a project decision, not a coverage fix.
Completion criterion: test runner identified, an example existing test read, off-limits known.
2. Scan — priority order, stop at the first real hit
- DI/mockable-dependency candidates (highest priority). Grep the logic/library directory for the repo's dependency-injection idiom — a
depsparameter injecting browser/platform globals (fetch, storage, timers), constructor injection, or an equivalent explicit seam. This is the highest-value target because the codebase has already signalled "designed to be tested without module-level mocking." - Coverage cross-check. For each candidate, grep the test directory/convention for any reference to the function name. Zero references = untested candidate.
- Fallback tier — pure functions. If no DI-pattern candidate is untested, fall back to any pure exported function (deterministic output, no hidden module-level state) in the logic layer with zero test references. Note explicitly in your output that this is the fallback tier, since it carries a weaker "designed to be tested" signal than tier 1.
What ships with it
8 files 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.
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 · 90 lines · 99 tokens per session scan A 395980e22a43
tend-tests is a skill published in the GitHub repository robcsaszar/tend (0 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 99 tokens to every session and 1,629 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
seams
Use when you want to unit-test logic but can't without a database, network, clock, or a pile of mocks — or when a function fetches, computes, branches on policy, and writes all in one breath. Splits the decision (pure logic) from the action (I/O and side effects) along the natural seam, so the logic becomes testable…
brooks-test
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow…
software-code-refactoring
Improve production code quality while preserving all existing test behavior. Commonly used for the Refactor phase of TDD red-green-refactor, but applicable to any codebase with tests. Use when production code works but needs cleanup — reducing duplication, improving naming, simplifying complexity, aligning with…
simplify-codebase
Simplification audit or authorized codebase simplification whose stated objective is to remove accidental complexity. Use for evidence-backed deletion or consolidation of dead code, duplicate state, redundant APIs or layers, ownerless abstractions, obsolete compatibility or design records, and over-engineering in any…
cyclomatic-complexity
Refactor code to reduce cyclomatic complexity so it stays readable, maintainable, and aligned with the long-term vision of the codebase, not just optimized for AI comprehension. Use whenever the user asks to refactor, simplify, clean up, or review code quality; mentions complexity, maintainability, readability…
refactor
Refactor code to improve structure and maintainability.