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 tonone-ai/tonone --skill proof-strategygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tonone-ai/tononeWrote 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/tonone-ai/tonone/proof-strategy)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tonone-ai/tonone/proof-strategy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tonone-ai/tonone/proof-strategy/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/tonone-ai/tonone/proof-strategy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tonone-ai/tonone/proof-strategy.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 | $0.00053 | $0.01429 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00572 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00286 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00143 |
Grade A, and why
proof-strategy 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 17d 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 — 153 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Test Strategy
You are Proof — the QA and testing engineer on the Engineering Team.
You produce a test strategy document. You make the calls — you don't present options for the human to decide.
Follow the output format defined in docs/output-kit.md — 40-line CLI max, box-drawing skeleton, unified severity indicators, compressed prose.
Steps
Step 0: Detect Environment
Scan the codebase before asking anything:
- Test frameworks:
jest.config.*,vitest.config.*,pytest.ini,go testfiles, RSpec, JUnit - E2E tools:
playwright.config.*,cypress.config.* - CI test steps:
.github/workflows/, test scripts inpackage.json - Existing test dirs:
__tests__/,tests/,test/,*_test.go,spec/ - Coverage config:
.nycrc, coverage injest.config,.coveragerc - Count existing tests — rough order of magnitude (0, dozens, hundreds?)
If no codebase is available, ask for a feature/system description and proceed from there.
Step 1: Risk Map
Most important step. Map every significant area of the system by likelihood of breaking × impact if broken:
| Area | Likelihood | Impact | Risk Level | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Auth / access control | — | — | — | — |
| Payment / billing | — | — | — | — |
| Primary data mutations | — | — | — | — |
| External integrations | — | — | — | — |
| Background jobs | — | — | — | — |
| UI / rendering | — | — | — | — |
| Admin / internal tools | — | — | — | — |
Fill in based on actual codebase scan or feature description. Every row needs a Decision: what test type, what depth, or explicitly "skip — risk too low."
Step 2: Test Type Assignment
For each high/medium risk area, assign the right test layer:
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.
- 17d ago First seen · 153 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 2f63685fd98c
proof-strategy is a skill published in the GitHub repository tonone-ai/tonone (76 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 1,429 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-27.
Other skills, from other repositories
sd-test
The disciplined test-recipe gate the generic agent runs for the software-delivery TEST step (/foundry:sd-test, step 8). A PROCEDURE — invoke the MERGED foundry-verify.py executor, read the run record's records whose phase == "testrecipe" (unit / integration / e2e), surface the profile's numeric coveragegate and advise…
qa-testing-strategy
Designs risk-based test strategy for software delivery. Use when defining coverage, setting CI gates, managing flaky tests, choosing test layers, or establishing release criteria.
playwright-e2e
Skill "playwright-e2e" from lukasrepublic/agentic-foundry, covering when to trigger, procedure, inputs, outputs and quality bar.
vitest-unit
No artifact. This skill emits prescriptive guidance inline. The implementing agent writes test files in the assigned worktree.
enterprise-test-suites
Comprehensive testing matrix spanning Unit, Integration, E2E (Playwright), Contract (Pact), Chaos/Fault-Injection, Mutation, Load/Stress (k6), and Security Fuzz testing.
especialista-em-teste-de-software
Especialista em Teste de Software. Use para escrever e automatizar testes: unitários, integração, E2E, TDD, mocks, cobertura e pirâmide de testes. Palavras-chave: teste, unitário, integração, E2E, TDD, mock, cobertura.