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/superplan-md/superplan-plugin/superplan-tddnpx skills add superplan-md/superplan-plugin --skill superplan-tddgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/superplan-md/superplan-pluginWhat 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 | $0.00028 | $0.00396 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00198 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00079 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
superplan-tdd 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 2d 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
Test-Driven Development
Overview
Write the test or equivalent check first. Watch it fail. Write the minimal code to pass.
Iron Law
No production code without a failing test or failing check first.
If code was written before the proof path, delete the shortcut and start from the failing test.
Hard Gate
Do not treat "I can add tests after" as equivalent. If the proof was not red first, it is not guiding the implementation.
Trigger
Use when:
- a task has clear enough acceptance criteria that tests or checks can express intended behavior
- feature work, bugfix work, or behavior change is about to start
Red Green Refactor
- Red: write one minimal failing test or check that expresses the contract.
- Verify red: confirm it fails for the expected reason.
- Green: write the simplest code that passes.
- Verify green: rerun the proof and keep other relevant checks green.
- Refactor: clean up without changing behavior.
Core Rules
- prefer the workspace's existing test and verification style
- derive tests or checks from the task contract and acceptance criteria
- if the repo lacks strong tests, define the cheapest honest proof before broad code changes
- keep the verification path aligned with what
superplan-reviewwill later judge - avoid adding test ceremony that fights the repo's actual setup
Forbidden Behavior
- writing tests after implementation and calling it equivalent
- writing vague proofs that do not actually pin the acceptance criteria
- forcing a test style the repo clearly does not use
- treating "I wrote a test" as proof the strategy is good
Handoff
After green, execution continues through the normal shaped path and later review still flows through superplan-review.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 57 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 227ebf68dd3f
superplan-tdd is a skill published in the GitHub repository superplan-md/superplan-plugin (72 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 396 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
improve
Autonomous quality improvement loop. Scores a target against a rubric, selects the highest-leverage axis, attacks it, verifies, documents, and loops. No pre-planning between iterations — each loop re-scores from scratch.
setup
First-run experience for the harness. Three modes: Recommended (guided, 3 min), Full Tour (guided + skill walkthrough, 8 min), and Express (zero questions, 30 sec). Installs hooks first, detects stack, configures harness.json, runs a live demo on real code, and prints a reference card.
evolve
Research-driven multi-cycle improvement director. Forms causal hypotheses about why scores are low, validates them with scout agents before attacking, dispatches axis-parallel fleet attacks, extracts transferable patterns, and runs indefinitely within a budget envelope. Accumulates a persistent belief model and…
research
Focused research investigations. Converts questions into structured findings with confidence levels and source citations. Single agent by default; with --parallel (or when the question decomposes into 3+ independent angles) it spawns scout agents whose findings are compressed into a unified brief. Does not make…
ascii-diagram
Generate perfectly aligned ASCII diagrams — architecture, flow, sequence, box-and-arrow. Uses a programmatic character-grid approach so alignment is guaranteed by math, not token prediction. Includes post-render verification.
triage
GitHub issue and PR investigator. Pulls open issues/PRs, classifies them, searches the codebase for root cause or reviews contributed code, proposes fixes with file:line references, and optionally implements fixes. Use for investigating GitHub issues and reviewing PRs; do NOT use for general code review unrelated to…