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 sharpninja/McpServer --skill byrd-tdd-processgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sharpninja/McpServerWrote 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/sharpninja/mcpserver/byrd-tdd-process)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sharpninja/mcpserver/byrd-tdd-process"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sharpninja/mcpserver/byrd-tdd-process/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/sharpninja/mcpserver/byrd-tdd-process"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sharpninja/mcpserver/byrd-tdd-process.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 | $0.00105 | $0.02015 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00042 | $0.00806 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00403 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00201 |
Grade A, and why
byrd-tdd-process 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 4d 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 — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Byrd Development Process v4 (TDD)
The canonical reference is docs/Development-Process-draft-v4.md. This process aligns with Martin Fowler's Red -> Green -> Refactor TDD cycle, augmented with Byrd-specific AI-safety gates (mocks-first validation, full-suite regression gates, and requirement traceability).
When to Use
- Implementing any new functional or technical requirement in this repo.
- Fixing a bug, changing behavior, or adding to a public surface (types, methods, controllers, services).
- Writing or updating any implementation plan. Per the global rule, no plan is exempt regardless of size, urgency, or scope.
When Not to Use
- Pure documentation edits, requirements wording, or session-log housekeeping that touch no code and no test.
- Mechanical, behavior-preserving renames or formatting where existing tests already fully cover the surface.
- Read-only investigation, diagnosis, or research where you produce no source change.
Inputs
- The Functional Requirement(s) being satisfied:
FR-MCP-*fromdocs/Project/Functional-Requirements.md. - The Technical Requirement(s):
TR-MCP-*fromdocs/Project/Technical-Requirements.md. - The Testing Requirement(s):
TEST-MCP-*fromdocs/Project/Testing-Requirements.md. - The active iteration / slice scope (which tests must be green to exit) from MCP TODO state.
- The target test project (for example
tests/QBrainAi.Support.Mcp.Tests) and the production project under change.
Critical Rules
- Requirements drive tests. Tests are derived from functional and technical requirements and their acceptance criteria, never from implementation details. If a requirement is missing, capture it first (see Requirements step) before writing the test.
- Tests come first (Red). Write acceptance unit tests covering the full acceptance criteria BEFORE writing implementation code. The test must fail for the right reason before you implement.
- Validate with mocks (Byrd augmentation). Make the new tests pass against mocks/stubs first, proving the test and the contract are correct, before wiring real logic.
- Then implement (Green). Only after the mock-backed tests are correct do you write the real production code that makes them pass without mocks. Refactor tests and production code as part of the cycle to keep the design clean.
- All tests green to exit a phase. The entire unit-test suite for the current increment AND all prior work must pass before leaving an Implementation slice. Per
AGENTS.md(Byrd Test Gate), skipped tests are not passing tests: the gate requires zero failures and zero skips in the executed scope. Deferred work belongs in MCP TODO/requirements state, never in a skipped-test placeholder. - Integration tests come after units. Implement integration tests only after all unit tests pass across the codebase. The Nuke
Testtarget excludes*.IntegrationTests; run those separately. - Traceability is mandatory. Every new public type and member needs XML doc comments (
TreatWarningsAsErrors+ CS1591 fail the build), and every newFR/TR/TESTid must be referenced in source/test doc-comments and validated by./build.ps1 ValidateTraceability. - Do not ship code you have not verified compiles and passes. Correctness over speed.
- Use
pwsh.exe(PowerShell 7+) for all scripts. No em-dashes in any output, code comment, or commit message. - Defective requirements are expected. If writing the test surfaces a paradox, ambiguity, or wrong rule, refine the requirement (and its FR/TR/TEST docs) rather than weakening the test.
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.
- 4d ago Changed fd114b9bd10b
- 1mo ago First seen · 86 lines · 105 tokens per session scan A 34b61700a3df
byrd-tdd-process is a skill published in the GitHub repository sharpninja/McpServer (4 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 105 tokens to every session and 2,015 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
agent-test-generator
Specialist subagent: Generates comprehensive test suites using TDD patterns. Use only when the user explicitly asks for tests, improved coverage, or test-first development.
testing
TDD/BDD testing principles. Use when writing tests, reviewing test coverage, setting up testing, or discussing test strategy and test architecture.
refactor-ops
Safe refactoring patterns - extract, rename, restructure with test-driven methodology and dead code detection. Use for: refactor, refactoring, extract function, extract component, rename, move file, restructure, dead code, unused imports, code smell, duplicate code, long function, god object, feature envy, DRY…
testing-ops
Cross-language testing strategies and patterns. Triggers on: test pyramid, unit test, integration test, e2e test, TDD, BDD, test coverage, mocking strategy, test doubles, test isolation.
pair-programming
AI-assisted pair programming with multiple modes (driver/navigator/switch), real-time verification, quality monitoring, and comprehensive testing. Supports TDD, debugging, refactoring, and learning sessions. Features automatic role switching, continuous code review, security scanning, and performance optimization with…
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.