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 swDomass/AI_orchestrator --skill test-loopgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/swDomass/AI_orchestratorWrote 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/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/test-loop)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/test-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/test-loop/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/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/test-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/swdomass/ai_orchestrator/test-loop.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 | $0.00015 | $0.00246 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00098 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00049 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00025 |
Grade A, and why
test-loop 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 1mo 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
System Prompt Addition
Run the test suite, analyze any failures, fix the root causes, and re-run. Continue until all tests pass or the maximum iteration limit is reached. Report a summary of what was fixed and the final test status.
Rundenreflexion (from iteration 2 on): before fixing, the fixer writes a
## Rundenreflexion section asking whether it is over-building or chasing an edge case
beyond the task. A failing test judged to be such an edge case may be deferred instead of
fixed: - [BEKANNTE GRENZE] <test id> — <reason>. No P1/P2/P3 model exists here — a
deferral never turns the run green; it stays red and is listed as "Bekannte Grenzen" in
the final failure message.
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.
- 1mo ago Changed · +7 lines 8c29432f60ee
- 1mo ago First seen · 20 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 9b91487fd4ff
test-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository swDomass/AI_orchestrator (5 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 246 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
qa-expert
Expert-level quality assurance, testing strategies, automation, and QA processes. Use when the user mentions testing, test automation, quality assurance, or Selenium, or when the task involves Testing Types, QA Processes, Test Strategy, or Defect Management.
code-review-expert
Expert-level code review focusing on quality, security, performance, and maintainability. Use this skill for conducting thorough code reviews, identifying issues, and providing constructive feedback.
test-generation
Generate a test strategy and starter test stubs for given modules across unit, integration, and e2e layers (pytest/jest/playwright). Trigger on: generate tests, test plan, test strategy, coverage plan, test scaffolding.
llm-evaluator
Evaluate LLM outputs systematically using LLM-as-judge, human evaluation frameworks, and regression testing. Use when assessing model quality, comparing models, or preventing quality regression.
rag-evaluator
Evaluate RAG pipeline quality across faithfulness, relevance, and hallucination metrics. Use when user asks to test, benchmark, or improve a RAG system, or when RAG outputs look wrong.
test-writing
Write tests that catch real regressions — behavior-focused, minimal mocking, edge cases chosen from the code's actual branches. Use when adding tests for new code or backfilling tests for a fix.