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/williamisnotdefined/rubiks-cube-solver/frontend-testingnpx skills add williamisnotdefined/rubiks-cube-solver --skill frontend-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/williamisnotdefined/rubiks-cube-solverWrote 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/williamisnotdefined/rubiks-cube-solver/frontend-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/williamisnotdefined/rubiks-cube-solver/frontend-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/williamisnotdefined/rubiks-cube-solver/frontend-testing.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 | $0.00024 | $0.03412 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.01706 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00682 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00341 |
Grade A, and why
frontend-testing 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 5d 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 — 221 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Generated from ai/registry.json. Do not edit manually.
Canonical skill: ../../../ai/skills/frontend-testing.md.
Referenced context:
../../../ai/rules/frontend-rules.md../../../ai/rules/testing-rules.md../../../ai/rules/frontend-quality-rules.md../../../ai/architecture/web-architecture.md
This file is compiled from canonical AI knowledge files. Edit canonical files under ai, then run npm run ai:sync.
Compiled AI Skill: frontend-testing
Canonical Skill: ai/skills/frontend-testing.md
Frontend Testing
Use for Vitest, Testing Library, API-domain tests, coverage, Storybook, and Playwright E2E.
Read First
ai/rules/frontend-rules.mdai/rules/testing-rules.mdai/rules/frontend-quality-rules.mdai/architecture/web-architecture.md
Workflow
- Test observable behavior at the narrowest public boundary and place it in the nearest established
__tests__folder. - Use accessible queries and shared API/E2E helpers; cover cancellation and recoverable failures where relevant.
- Keep global statements, branches, functions, and lines thresholds at 90%.
- Run the targeted test first, then coverage, Storybook, or the relevant E2E split for the changed surface.
Referenced Context
Reference: ai/rules/frontend-rules.md
Frontend Rules
Boundaries
- Keep solving, notation semantics, puzzle validity, and replay verification in Rust. React renders and coordinates typed product workflows.
- Keep HTTP mechanics and normalization in
apps/web/src/api; UI consumes domain hooks/adapters. - Typed scan-session contracts MAY contain reviewed stickers, confidence, and manual overrides. Notation solve UI MUST NOT expose facelet, Kociemba, or raw cube-state inputs.
- Keep API load, form, page workflow, solve result, scanner review, and visualization playback state separately owned unless a focused page owner coordinates them.
- Use the active
@rubiks-cube-solver/rubiks-cubepackage as a visualization adapter, never as canonical solver state.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 221 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 7662e88fab88
frontend-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository williamisnotdefined/rubiks-cube-solver (4 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 3,412 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
testing
Testing workflow and quality standards for writing and running tests. Use when: (1) Writing new tests, (2) Adding a new feature that needs tests, (3) Modifying logic that has existing tests, (4) Before claiming a task is complete.
testing-patterns
Testing patterns and principles. Unit, integration, mocking strategies.
testing
Writing or debugging tests, choosing unit vs integration style, Postgres/ClickHouse tests, regenerating ClickHouse test schema, or exporting test helpers from packages without pulling test code into production bundles.
detect-flaky-tests
Detects flaky Go tests by analyzing GitHub Actions workflow runs across the last 7 days and all PRs — covering both the run-tests job (unit/integration) and the e2e-test job (gVisor and microVM lanes). For each newly-detected flaky test or infra issue, opens a GitHub issue with full evidence and a draft fix PR. Does…
test-pyramid
Analyze the repo's unit and E2E tests and propose rebalancing toward a test pyramid — which E2E tests (or assertions inside them) can be covered by unit tests, which unit-level gaps genuinely need E2E coverage, and where coverage is duplicated. Use when the user asks about test pyramid, test rebalancing, "should this…
designing-tests
Designs and implements testing strategies for any codebase. Use when adding tests, improving coverage, setting up testing infrastructure, debugging test failures, or when asked about unit tests, integration tests, or E2E testing.