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 tobihagemann/turbo --skill create-test-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tobihagemann/turboWrote 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/tobihagemann/turbo/create-test-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tobihagemann/turbo/create-test-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tobihagemann/turbo/create-test-plan/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/tobihagemann/turbo/create-test-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tobihagemann/turbo/create-test-plan.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 | $0.00087 | $0.01696 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00044 | $0.00848 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00339 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00170 |
Grade A, and why
create-test-plan 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 150 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Create Test Plan
Analyze what changed and generate a comprehensive test plan covering four escalating levels of testing depth.
Step 1: Determine Scope
Resolve scope using the first match:
- User-specified — the user says what to test. Use that.
- PR — a PR URL or number is provided. Fetch the PR details (title, description, changed files, comments) and read the changed code.
- Conversation context — prior conversation contains recent work (a feature, fix, or refactor). Extract what changed, where it lives, and expected behavior.
- App-level discovery — fresh context with no prior work. Examine the project (entry points, routes, commands, README) to identify the app's core user-facing flows.
If the resolved scope spans more than one git branch and the user named no single branch, cover each of them instead of only the branch currently checked out. Include scenarios that exercise them together where the branches can be combined in the working tree the plan's executor will have, and state the required branch state in each such scenario's steps.
Step 2: Determine Testing Approach
Always check for project-specific testing skills or MCP tools first. Use the fallbacks below when nothing project-specific is available:
- Web app →
/agent-browserskill if available, otherwiseclaude-in-chromeMCP - UI/native app →
computer-useMCP - CLI tool → direct terminal execution
- Library with no entry point → report that interactive testing is not applicable and stop
Step 3: Resolve the Output Path
Pick a slug for the test plan from the change under test:
- Lowercase
- Replace non-alphanumeric characters with hyphens
- Collapse consecutive hyphens
- Trim leading and trailing hyphens
- Truncate to 40 characters at a word boundary
If the work is anchored to an existing plan at .turbo/plans/<slug>.md, reuse that plan's slug verbatim.
The user may pass an explicit slug or output path; honor it.
Resolve a collision at .turbo/test-plans/<slug>.md by how the slug was chosen. A slug generated from the change under test takes -2, -3, and so on until the path is free; do not overwrite. For a slug reused from an anchoring artifact, use AskUserQuestion to offer overwrite or a different slug, since a numeric suffix would break its pairing with that artifact. For a slug or path the user supplied, use AskUserQuestion to offer overwrite, a numeric suffix, or a different slug.
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 Changed 6ee388d4d304
- 4d ago Changed · +2 lines 1d4974631bc2
- 6d ago Changed · +2 lines 475cb23a7078
- 10d ago First seen · 146 lines · 87 tokens per session scan A a7edddfe7fa4
create-test-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository tobihagemann/turbo (402 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 87 tokens to every session and 1,696 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
tdd
Test-driven development with red-green-refactor loop. Use when user wants to build features or fix bugs using TDD, mentions "red-green-refactor", wants integration tests, or asks for test-first development.
offensive-fuzzing
Practical offensive fuzzing methodology covering target identification, fuzzer selection (AFL++, libFuzzer, Honggfuzz, Boofuzz, syzkaller), harness writing, corpus curation, mutation strategies, coverage measurement, and crash triage. Use when setting up or running fuzz campaigns against any target: file parsers…
offensive-business-logic
Business logic vulnerability testing for web/mobile/API engagements. Covers workflow bypass, state machine violations, multi-step process abuse, price/quantity/discount manipulation, currency confusion, coupon stacking, refund/chargeback abuse, race conditions on logic boundaries, parameter tampering for hidden flows…
api-tester
A tool for creating and checking API tests from the real API contract and implementation. An API is the agreed way that software sends requests and receives responses.
test-generator
A test-writing helper that creates unit or integration tests from the code's actual behavior and contracts. Unit tests check small pieces of code, while integration tests check how real components work together.
offensive-race-condition
Race condition (TOCTOU) testing checklist: identifying timing windows, Burp Suite Turbo Intruder, Last-Byte sync technique, rate limit bypass, double-spend attacks, and concurrent request exploitation. Use for web app race condition testing or bug bounty time-of-check-to-time-of-use bugs.