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 rockyflux/yq-workflow --skill yq-test-gengit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rockyflux/yq-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/rockyflux/yq-workflow/yq-test-gen)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rockyflux/yq-workflow/yq-test-gen"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rockyflux/yq-workflow/yq-test-gen/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/rockyflux/yq-workflow/yq-test-gen"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rockyflux/yq-workflow/yq-test-gen.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 | $0.00032 | $0.00634 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00317 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00127 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00063 |
Grade A, and why
yq-test-gen 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.
What it actually says
YQ Test Generation
Overview
把需求、设计和实现转成可执行测试，覆盖主路径、边界条件、异常分支和回归风险。
Core principle: 测试先服务于行为保护，再服务于实现细节。
When to Use
- 用户要补测试、写单测、集成测试或回归用例
- 新功能已实现，需要建立保护网
- 修 bug 后需要用测试锁住回归
- 模块复杂、依赖多、改动风险高
Route Elsewhere
- 行为和边界还没定：先转
yq-req-analysis或yq-system-design - 主要是实现功能：转
yq-code-gen - 主要是审查改动质量：转
yq-code-review
Process
- 提炼验收点、关键分支和最高风险行为。
- 选择测试层次：单元、集成、契约或端到端。
- 设计主流程、边界、异常和权限场景。
- 明确测试数据、夹具、mock 和稳定性要求。
- 标注当前覆盖缺口和后续补测建议。
Output
# Test Plan or Test Result
## Coverage Targets
## Test Cases
## Test Level Strategy
## Fixtures / Mocks / Data Setup
## Edge Cases
## Known Gaps
## Recommended Next Step
Related Skills
- 上游通常来自
yq-code-gen、yq-debug - 下游通常接
yq-code-review、yq-security-scan - 写行为保护时建议参考
superpowers:test-driven-development
Recommended Next Step
- 默认交给
yq-code-review，检查正确性、回归风险和测试缺口 - 如果改动涉及权限、敏感数据或外部输入，可并行补
yq-security-scan
Common Mistakes
- 只测 happy path
- 过度 mock，脱离真实行为
- 用实现细节驱动测试命名和断言
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 85 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 4b70c0f2999b
yq-test-gen is a skill published in the GitHub repository rockyflux/yq-workflow (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 634 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
axiom-testing
Use when writing ANY test, debugging flaky tests, making tests faster, or choosing Swift Testing vs XCTest. Covers unit tests, UI tests, async testing, test architecture.
designing-tests
Designs and implements testing strategies for any codebase. Use when adding tests, improving coverage, setting up testing infrastructure, debugging test failures, or when asked about unit tests, integration tests, or E2E testing.
test-automation
Execute Vitest and Playwright test suites with result collection and failure analysis.
testing-blocks
Use this when you have made AEM Edge Delivery Services code changes to blocks, scripts, or styles and need to validate them before opening a pull request. Covers unit testing for utilities and logic, browser testing with Playwright, linting, and guidance on what to test and how.
prd-auto-test-loop
A testing workflow driven by a product requirements document (PRD), which describes what a software version should do. It turns acceptance criteria into unit, integration, and end-to-end tests, then records the plan and results.
test-automation-expert
Comprehensive test automation specialist covering unit, integration, and E2E testing strategies. Expert in Jest, Vitest, Playwright, Cypress, pytest, and modern testing frameworks. Guides test pyramid design, coverage optimization, flaky test detection, and CI/CD integration. Activate on 'test strategy', 'unit tests'…