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/thkt/dotclaude/use-workflow-tdd-cyclenpx skills add thkt/dotclaude --skill use-workflow-tdd-cyclegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/thkt/dotclaudeWrote 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/thkt/dotclaude/use-workflow-tdd-cycle)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thkt/dotclaude/use-workflow-tdd-cycle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thkt/dotclaude/use-workflow-tdd-cycle.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00021 | $0.01535 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00767 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00307 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00153 |
Grade A, and why
use-workflow-tdd-cycle 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 6d 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 — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
use-workflow-tdd-cycle
公開 API を通して振る舞いをテストする。Mock はシステム境界でのみ。
バリアント選択
下表でバリアントが決まらないとき、およびテストが実装を検証していないか確かめるときは ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/test-philosophy.md を読む。
| トリガー | バリアント | 参照 |
|---|---|---|
spec.md / 新機能 (/code) |
Feature-driven | ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/feature-driven.md |
バグ報告 / リグレッション (/fix) |
Bug-driven | ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/bug-driven.md |
| 既存コードベースのカバレッジギャップ | Coverage-driven | テストを active にし skip しない。下記 RGRC を再利用 |
何をテストするか
| 優先度 | 内容 |
|---|---|
| 必須 | ビジネスロジック、サービス、クリティカルパス、エッジケース |
| 文脈依存 | 複雑な util、custom hook、変換 |
| スキップ | 単純な accessor、UI レイアウト、外部ライブラリの挙動 |
TDD を使わない場面
| 文脈 | 理由 |
|---|---|
| 使い捨てのプロトタイプ | 廃棄される可能性が高い、コスト > 効果 |
| 外部 API 連携 | API を mock する。連携は mock しない |
| 単純な one-off スクリプト | テストの方が長くなる |
| UI 実験 | まずビジュアル、後でロジックを抽出 |
RGRC サイクル
Red でテストを書く前に ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/writing-tests.md を読み、テスト設計技法、アサーション品質、mock の境界を適用する。
| フェーズ | 目標 | ルール | よくある間違い |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red | 失敗するテスト | 失敗が意図する挙動の差分と一致することを確認。syntax/import エラー不可 | テストが即座にパスする |
| Green | テストをパス | "罪を犯してよい" - 汚いコードでも OK | 実装しすぎ |
| Refactor | 綺麗なコード | テストを green に保つ。読みやすくなる場合に限り縮める。基準は ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../rules/PRINCIPLES.md | 振る舞いを変更してしまう。難読化する圧縮 |
| Commit | 状態を保存 | 全チェックがパス | チェックを飛ばす |
What ships with it
5 files 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.
- 6d ago First seen · 98 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 0ae4b71245d5
use-workflow-tdd-cycle is a skill published in the GitHub repository thkt/dotclaude (12 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,535 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
verification-quality
Truth scoring, code-quality verification, and automatic rollback with a high accuracy threshold. Use when validating agent output before it ships, gating changes on quality, or adding a verify-and-rollback safety loop.
excellence-review
Mandatory excellence gates for Grok+ACOS. verification-loop, santa-method, gstack-qa, plan-reviews, repo-mastery, cso, rules-distill. Never ship without evidence (gstack screenshots, metrics). Use on any build/suggest/lead task.
implementation-review
Pre-commit quality gate. Invoke before every git commit, after /flagrare:staleness-audit. Seven checks, plan gaps, use-case coverage gaps, missing test scenarios, test philosophy violations (Kent Dodds Testing Trophy), SOLID violations, Clean Code violations, and security vulnerabilities. Each check is delegated to a…
wrap-up
Post-implementation quality gate. Runs automated checks (tests, lint, types), invokes /flagrare:implementation-review for the seven-check parallel review, then performs additional SOLID and Clean Code review on any findings not covered. Use when the user says 'wrap up', 'review changes', 'check my work', 'am I done'…
springboot-testing
Spring Boot testing discipline — TDD workflow with JUnit 5, @SpringBootTest slicing (@WebMvcTest, @DataJpaTest), MockMvc, Testcontainers, and the verification gates a Spring Boot change must pass before it ships (build, coverage floor, static analysis, integration checks). Use when writing Spring Boot tests or…
verify-implementation
프로젝트의 모든 verify 스킬을 실행하여 통합 패턴 검증 보고서를 생성합니다. 기능 구현 후, PR 전, 코드 리뷰 시 사용.