Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to T-rav/hydraflow. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/T-rav/hydraflow/staging/.codex/skills/hf.audit-tests/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/T-rav/hydraflowWrote 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/t-rav/hydraflow/hf.audit-tests)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/t-rav/hydraflow/hf.audit-tests"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/t-rav/hydraflow/hf.audit-tests/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/t-rav/hydraflow/hf.audit-tests"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/t-rav/hydraflow/hf.audit-tests.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00006 | $0.03240 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.01296 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00648 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00324 |
Grade A, and why
hf.audit-tests scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 303 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test Audit
Run a comprehensive test quality audit across the entire repo. Analyzes test naming, structure, factory usage, anti-patterns, coverage gaps, and flaky patterns. Creates GitHub issues for findings so HydraFlow can process them.
Instructions
-
Resolve configuration before doing anything else:
- Run
echo "$HYDRAFLOW_GITHUB_REPO"— if set, use it as the target repo (e.g.,owner/repo). If empty, rungit remote get-url originand extract theowner/reposlug (striphttps://github.com/prefix and.gitsuffix). - Run
echo "$HYDRAFLOW_GITHUB_ASSIGNEE"— if set, use it as the issue assignee. If empty, extract the owner from the repo slug (the part before/). - Use
hydraflow-planas the label for created issues. - Store resolved values as
$REPO,$ASSIGNEE,$LABEL.
- Run
-
Discover project structure:
- Use Glob to find all test files:
**/test_*.py,**/tests/conftest.py,**/tests/helpers.py - Exclude
.venv/,venv/,__pycache__/,node_modules/ - Also find all UI test files:
ui/src/**/*.test.jsx,ui/src/**/*.test.js - Count total test files and identify the test helper infrastructure
- Use Glob to find all test files:
-
Launch agents in parallel using
Taskwithrun_in_background: trueandsubagent_type: "general-purpose":- Agent 1: Test naming & structure — Checks naming conventions, 3As structure, single responsibility, and organization.
- Agent 2: Anti-patterns & flaky tests — Detects over-mocking, weak assertions, flaky patterns, and test isolation issues.
- Agent 3: Factory/fixture gaps & coverage — Finds missing factories, repeated setup, coverage gaps, and missing edge case tests.
-
Wait for all agents to complete.
-
After all finish, run
gh issue list --repo $REPO --label $LABEL --state open --search "test quality" --limit 200to show the user a final summary of all issues created.
Agent 1: Test Naming & Structure
You are a test quality auditor focused on naming and structure for the project at {repo_root}.
## Configuration
- GitHub repo: {REPO}
- Assignee: {ASSIGNEE}
- Label: {LABEL}
## Steps
### Phase 1: Read All Test Files
1. Use Glob to find all test files: tests/test_*.py, ui/src/**/*.test.jsx
2. Read each test file
### Phase 2: Audit Test Naming
3. Check every test function/method name against the convention:
- **Pattern**: `test_<method/feature>_<scenario>[_<expected_result>]`
- **Flag**: names < 3 words (e.g., `test_init`, `test_run`)
- **Flag**: generic names (test_1, test_something, test_basic)
- **Flag**: redundant "test" in name (test_user_test)
- **Flag**: names that don't describe what's being tested
For each violation, note: file path, line number, current name, suggested better name
### Phase 3: Audit 3As Structure (Arrange-Act-Assert)
4. For each test function, check:
- Is there clear separation of setup, execution, and verification?
- Is all arrange code before the act?
- Are all assertions after the act?
- Are phases mixed? (e.g., assertions interleaved with setup)
- Does setup dominate the test? (> 60% of lines are setup — push into factories/fixtures)
### Phase 4: Audit Single Responsibility
5. For each test, count assertions:
- Flag tests with > 3 assertions testing **different** attributes (related assertions on the same result are OK)
- Suggest splitting into focused tests
- Note tests with zero assertions (test does nothing useful)
### Phase 5: Audit Test Organization
6. Check file-level organization:
- Are test classes used to group related tests?
- Are tests organized to mirror source file structure?
- Are there test files > 500 lines that should be split?
- Are there test files with < 3 tests (too granular)?
### Phase 6: Create GitHub Issues
7. Check for duplicate GH issues first:
gh issue list --repo {REPO} --label {LABEL} --state open --search "<key terms>"
8. Create GH issues for NEW findings only, grouped by theme:
gh issue create --repo {REPO} --assignee {ASSIGNEE} --label {LABEL} --title "Test Quality: <theme>" --body "<details>"
## Issue Body Format
```markdown
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 First seen · 303 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A 020e20353ead
hf.audit-tests is a skill published in the GitHub repository T-rav/hydraflow (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 3,240 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
debug
Run /debug to find and fix a bug's root cause: a test failing for an unclear reason, /check verify finding a failure, or behavior being wrong. Runs a reproduce, localize, hypothesize, test, fix, verify loop, makes the minimal fix, and hands a regression test to /test. No features, no extra refactors.
check
Confirm a change before merge. /check verify drives the real app to prove behavior against the spec (every acceptance criterion met, every surface built). /check review runs a senior code review on a fresh model, one that did not write the code. Verify after /develop, review before a PR. Writes to docs/reviews/, never…
finding-reconciliation
Merge the independent A/B/C findings tables into one adjudicated ledger in 07-verification/documentation-verification-report.md — normalizing to the finding schema, deduplicating by location and claim, recording per-finding corroboration without downgrading single-pass findings, promoting cross-pass disagreement to…
scoring-and-release-gate
Score a documentation package against the ten-dimension weighted rubric in references/scorecard-rubric.md with a cited justification per dimension, then evaluate the nineteen conditions in references/release-gate-conditions.md and emit a binary release-ready, conditionally-ready, or not-ready verdict with…
verification-protocol
Run one independent verification pass over a documentation package by attempting to falsify it — a coverage inventory rebuilt from the contracts rather than the index, a two-stratum claim sample, end-to-end traces executed against the sources, audience task simulation, and mechanics validation — emitting findings in…
criterion-verification-map
Transform acceptance criteria into plan-time runnable verification commands (behavioral, API, UI, error, performance, config, data, contract types) with expected evidence shapes and risk areas, then execute at verify time and assemble the evidence bundle with its mandatory completeness subsections, including test…