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/seasonedcc/discord-manager/testingnpx skills add seasonedcc/discord-manager --skill testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/seasonedcc/discord-managerWrote 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/seasonedcc/discord-manager/testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/seasonedcc/discord-manager/testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/seasonedcc/discord-manager/testing.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 | $0.00101 | $0.04378 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.02189 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00876 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00438 |
Grade A, and why
testing 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 — 230 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Testing
Everything here documents the repository as it is on main. If main disagrees with this file, main wins: follow it and flag the drift.
Two suites and a standing gate. Unit tests exercise business functions against a real SQLite database with no mocks. End-to-end specs drive the real MCP server over stdio, seeded through the real ingestion functions by a scripted fake gateway feed. The dev-seed coverage gate proves every registered tool answers with demo state from a freshly dev-seeded store.
Commands
pnpm run test:unit # every unit test, TZ=UTC
pnpm run test:e2e # the E2E specs, then the tool coverage gate
pnpm run test:seed-coverage # every tool answers from a freshly dev-seeded store
pnpm run test # unit, E2E, then the seed-coverage gate
pnpm run lint
pnpm run tsc
Always run lint, tsc, and test:unit before opening a PR. Run the E2E specs a change directly touches; a change to the seed, the client harness, or the runner touches every spec, so there the whole suite is the directly-touched set. Run test:seed-coverage whenever a change touches the dev seed, registers or renames a tool, or reshapes what a tool answers.
To run a subset, pass arguments straight to pnpm run test:e2e with no -- separator: positional arguments filter specs by filename substring, and --repeat=<n> reruns the filtered set — pnpm run test:e2e waiting-for-activity --repeat=2. The runner is tests/run-e2e.ts; the tool coverage gate only judges a full, unfiltered run.
Test-driven development
For a bug or a new behavior, follow Red-Green-Refactor:
- Red — write a test that reproduces the issue or states the new behavior. It must fail.
- Green — implement the minimum that makes it pass.
- Refactor — clean up with everything still green.
Mutation proofs
A green suite proves nothing about a specific test until that test has been seen red for the right reason. When the code under test already exists — a fix being re-verified, a regression test over already-correct code — red-first is not natural, so substitute a mutation proof:
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 · 230 lines · 101 tokens per session scan A 3a68b854a2cf
testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository seasonedcc/discord-manager (3 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 101 tokens to every session and 4,378 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
testing
Testing workflow and quality standards for writing and running tests. Use when: (1) Writing new tests, (2) Adding a new feature that needs tests, (3) Modifying logic that has existing tests, (4) Before claiming a task is complete.
testing-patterns
Testing patterns and principles. Unit, integration, mocking strategies.
testing
Writing or debugging tests, choosing unit vs integration style, Postgres/ClickHouse tests, regenerating ClickHouse test schema, or exporting test helpers from packages without pulling test code into production bundles.
detect-flaky-tests
Detects flaky Go tests by analyzing GitHub Actions workflow runs across the last 7 days and all PRs — covering both the run-tests job (unit/integration) and the e2e-test job (gVisor and microVM lanes). For each newly-detected flaky test or infra issue, opens a GitHub issue with full evidence and a draft fix PR. Does…
test-pyramid
Analyze the repo's unit and E2E tests and propose rebalancing toward a test pyramid — which E2E tests (or assertions inside them) can be covered by unit tests, which unit-level gaps genuinely need E2E coverage, and where coverage is duplicated. Use when the user asks about test pyramid, test rebalancing, "should this…
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.