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 stagentic/stagentic-xdd --skill stage-03-oi-only-typogit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/stagentic/stagentic-xddWrote 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/stagentic/stagentic-xdd/stage-03-oi-only-typo)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/stagentic/stagentic-xdd/stage-03-oi-only-typo"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stagentic/stagentic-xdd/stage-03-oi-only-typo/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/stagentic/stagentic-xdd/stage-03-oi-only-typo"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stagentic/stagentic-xdd/stage-03-oi-only-typo.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 | $0.00020 | $0.00201 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00080 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00040 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00020 |
Grade A, and why
xdd 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 23d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- xdd — 89% identical, 2 lines differ
What it actually says
Apply the disciplines of TDD for adding or changing code overriding your understanding with the following principles:
Always write the test first
The test should always be written before the production code that makes it pass.
Failing for the right reason
A test fails for the right reason when it has an assertion failure where the actual result is not matching the expected result.
Do Not Use the 'Obvious Implementation' strategy to make a test pass
The Obvious Implementation strategy is when you make a test pass with a known implementation.
For example, Obvious Implmentation is when you have a test asserting is_even(2) == True then write
return n % 2 == 0 when return True would have also passed the test (and not break any others).
Do not use the Obvious Implementation strategy.
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.
- 23d ago First seen · 25 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A c801d8ba352a
xdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository stagentic/stagentic-xdd (5 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 201 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-26.
Other skills, from other repositories
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
conductor-implement
Execute tasks from a track's implementation plan following TDD workflow.
principle-test-behavior-not-implementation
Apply when you write, change, or keep a test. Assert what the code's users can observe, so that the test fails when that behavior breaks and keeps passing when only the internals change.
iterative-development
TDD iteration loops using Claude Code Stop hooks - runs tests after each response, feeds failures back automatically.
python
Python development with ruff, mypy, pytest - TDD and type safety.
tdd
This skill should be used when the user wants to implement features or fix bugs using test-driven development. Enforces the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle with vertical slicing, context isolation between test writing and implementation, human checkpoints, and auto-test feedback loops. Uses multi-agent orchestration with the…