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/thoughtbot/rails-consultant/test-driven-developmentnpx skills add thoughtbot/rails-consultant --skill test-driven-developmentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/thoughtbot/rails-consultantWrote 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/thoughtbot/rails-consultant/test-driven-development)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/thoughtbot/rails-consultant/test-driven-development"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/thoughtbot/rails-consultant/test-driven-development.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 | $0.00068 | $0.03940 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.01970 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00788 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00394 |
Grade A, and why
test-driven-development 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 3d 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 — 494 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test-Driven Development (TDD)
Overview
Write the test first. Watch it fail. Write minimal code to pass.
Core principle: If you didn't watch the test fail, you don't know if it tests the right thing.
Violating the letter of the rules is violating the spirit of the rules.
The Iron Law
NO PRODUCTION CODE WITHOUT A FAILING TEST FIRST
Write code before the test? Delete it. Start over.
No exceptions:
- Don't keep it as "reference"
- Don't "adapt" it while writing tests
- Don't look at it
- Delete means delete
Implement fresh from tests. Period.
Outside-In Development
Start every feature with a high-level test that describes behavior from the user's perspective. Run it, read the failure, and let that failure dictate your next move. As failures push you down the stack, write a new failing test at each layer you drop into — never write code for a layer without a failing test at that layer demanding it.
Read examples/outside-in-testing.md for a walkthrough of the philosophy and examples/testing-pyramid.md for how test types combine into an optimal suite.
One Change, One Run
After every change — writing a test, adding a route, creating a file, implementing a method — run the affected test immediately:
bundle exec rspec spec/features/guest_searches_for_items_spec.rb
The failure message is your instruction for what to do next. Don't batch changes and don't guess ahead: one change, one run, read the failure, decide. If you made two changes before running, you no longer know which one the test is reacting to.
Drop Down by Writing the Next Failing Test
A failure rarely means "write this exact line." It usually means "the layer below isn't there yet." When the active test's failure points to a layer that has behavior of its own — a controller action, an endpoint, a model method — drop down and write a failing test at that layer before building it.
Think of it as a stack of failing tests:
- The active test is the one whose failure you're reading right now.
- Its failure points to a missing lower layer → write a new failing test at that layer. It becomes the active test.
- Drive that test with Red-Green-Refactor. If it forces you down another level, push another failing test.
- When the active test goes green, pop it: rerun the test one layer up. Its next failure drives the next move.
What ships with it
3 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.
- 3d ago First seen · 494 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A 03dcf33a19b9
test-driven-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository thoughtbot/rails-consultant (23 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 3,940 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
upgrade-cleanup
Clean up after (or abandon) a Rails upgrade. Drop NextRails.next? and NextRails.current? branches and retire dual-boot scaffolding (Gemfile.next, Gemfile.next.lock, conditional Gemfile groups), keeping either the next or the current version. Trigger when the user says they are done with the upgrade, want to clean up…
recursive-decomposition
Handle tasks that exceed the context window by decomposing them: size and filter the input, chunk it, run recursive sub-agents on independent parts, verify on small windows, and synthesise programmatically, following the Recursive Language Models (RLM) research by Zhang, Kraska and Khattab (2025). Use when a task…
typescript-react-nextjs-patterns
Production-grade TypeScript reference for React & Next.js frontend development. Covers type narrowing, component Props, generic hooks, discriminated unions, as const, satisfies, Zod validation, TanStack Query, server/client boundaries, forms, state management, performance, accessibility, debugging, and code review.…
swarm
Run a multi-agent audit of a codebase by spawning specialized parallel subagents (security, performance, tests, architecture, dead-code), then synthesize their findings into a single prioritized action plan. Use this whenever the user runs /swarm, asks to "audit the repo," "review this codebase," "find issues across…
crisp-execute
CRISP Execute — Sprint execution loop with change request management, security gates, product gates, and stakeholder reporting. Use after Phase S (Spec) is complete and crisp-state.json shows readyforexecute: true. Triggers on "start sprint", "begin build", "execute", "sprint 1", "run sprints", or when handed off from…
phase1-clarify
The Mileva Method (CRISP) — Phase 1: Clarify. Problem definition, eliciting, painkiller test, buy vs build, AI justification gate, Go/No-Go. Use at the start of any AI implementation project. Triggers on "clarify", "phase 1", "start discovery", "define the problem", "what problem are we solving", or at the beginning…