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 yaleh/meta-cc --skill b002-extractedgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yaleh/meta-ccWrote 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/yaleh/meta-cc/b002-extracted)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yaleh/meta-cc/b002-extracted"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yaleh/meta-cc/b002-extracted/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/yaleh/meta-cc/b002-extracted"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yaleh/meta-cc/b002-extracted.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 | $0.00173 | $0.02976 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00086 | $0.01488 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00035 | $0.00595 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00298 |
Grade A, and why
Testing Strategy (Extracted) 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 4d 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 — 429 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Testing Strategy
Transform ad-hoc testing into systematic, coverage-driven strategy with 15x speedup.
Coverage is a means, quality is the goal. Systematic testing beats heroic testing.
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when:
- 🎯 Starting new project: Need systematic testing from day 1
- 📊 Coverage below 75%: Want to reach 80%+ systematically
- 🔧 Test infrastructure: Building fixtures, mocks, test helpers
- 🖥️ CLI applications: Need CLI-specific testing patterns
- 🔄 Refactoring legacy: Adding tests to existing code
- 📈 Quality gates: Implementing CI/CD coverage enforcement
Don't use when:
- ❌ Coverage already >90% with good quality
- ❌ Non-Go projects without adaptation (89% transferable, needs language-specific adjustments)
- ❌ No CI/CD infrastructure (automation tools require CI integration)
- ❌ Time budget <10 hours (methodology requires investment)
Quick Start (30 minutes)
Step 1: Measure Baseline (10 min)
# Run tests with coverage
go test -coverprofile=coverage.out ./...
go tool cover -func=coverage.out
# Identify gaps
# - Total coverage %
# - Packages below 75%
# - Critical paths uncovered
Step 2: Apply Coverage-Driven Gap Closure (15 min)
Priority algorithm:
- Critical paths first: Core business logic, error handling
- Low-hanging fruit: Pure functions, simple validators
- Complex integrations: File I/O, external APIs, CLI commands
Step 3: Use Test Pattern (5 min)
// Table-driven test pattern
func TestFunction(t *testing.T) {
tests := []struct {
name string
input InputType
want OutputType
wantErr bool
}{
{"happy path", validInput, expectedOutput, false},
{"error case", invalidInput, zeroValue, true},
}
for _, tt := range tests {
t.Run(tt.name, func(t *testing.T) {
got, err := Function(tt.input)
if (err != nil) != tt.wantErr {
t.Errorf("error = %v, wantErr %v", err, tt.wantErr)
}
if !reflect.DeepEqual(got, tt.want) {
t.Errorf("got %v, want %v", got, tt.want)
}
})
}
}
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 429 lines · 173 tokens per session scan A 1bedaf1c6812
Testing Strategy (Extracted) is a skill published in the GitHub repository yaleh/meta-cc (21 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 173 tokens to every session and 2,976 once invoked, about $0.0009 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 2026-09-16.
Other skills, from other repositories
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
iterative-development
TDD iteration loops using Claude Code Stop hooks - runs tests after each response, feeds failures back automatically.
python
Python development with ruff, mypy, pytest - TDD and type safety.
nw-fp-clojure
Clojure language-specific patterns, data-first modeling, REPL-driven development, and spec.
strict-tdd
Strict RED->GREEN->REFACTOR test-driven development with enforcement. Never write production code before a failing test. Atomic commits per TDD cycle.
mobiai-mobile-tdd
You MUST use this before writing any implementation code for a mobile feature, bug fix, refactor, or behavior change. Tests come before implementation — no exceptions.