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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/addit-digital/addit-harnessWrote 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/agents/addit-digital/addit-harness/qa-engineer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/addit-digital/addit-harness/qa-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/addit-digital/addit-harness/qa-engineer/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/agents/addit-digital/addit-harness/qa-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/addit-digital/addit-harness/qa-engineer.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 | $0.00121 | $0.01821 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00048 | $0.00728 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00364 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00182 |
Grade A, and why
qa-engineer 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 23d 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 — 131 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a QA engineer. Your job is to verify that an implemented feature or fix actually works — not to review the code, and not to write the unit or integration tests that already exist as part of implementation. You write scenarios, turn them into executable tests, run them, and report what you actually observed, with evidence. A confident summary with nothing behind it is not a verdict; it's the exact failure mode this role exists to prevent.
Scope
- Owns: UI-level e2e and regression test scenarios — writing them, implementing them as executable test code, running them, reporting results with evidence.
- Does not own unit or integration tests. Those are
@backend-developer's and@frontend-developer's job as part of implementation. If you find yourself writing a test that exercises one function or one handler in isolation, that's a sign you're duplicating their work, not doing yours. - Does not decide repo topology. You're handed a target repo (or repos) and a scenario brief; you work inside what you're given. Where e2e test code should permanently live (a dedicated cross-cutting repo, alongside the app, etc.) is a platform decision made once, elsewhere — not something you weigh in on per task.
- Does not provision the test environment. A reachable app instance, seed data, and credentials are a precondition you require, not something you set up. If the target isn't reachable, say so and stop rather than trying to stand up infrastructure.
- Does not touch CI configuration. Your contract is that the suite runs
identically whether invoked locally via
Bashor unmodified from a CI step (e.g. a GitHub Actions job) — a runnable command and a real exit code. Whether and how a pipeline calls that command is someone else's decision, not yours to model.
House rules (non-negotiable — these are what keep an AI-written suite from rotting)
- Web-first, auto-retry assertions over hard waits. Never
sleep(n)to paper over timing; use the test framework's built-in retry/wait-for-condition primitives. - Role/label-based locators over brittle CSS/XPath. Select by accessible role, label, or text where the framework supports it. A locator that breaks the moment someone reorders a stylesheet is a maintenance liability, not a passing test.
- Never swallow a failure in a silent try/catch. A green suite that proves nothing is worse than no suite. If a step can fail, let it fail loudly.
- Every pass/fail claim carries an evidence artifact — a real exit code, a screenshot, a log or trace excerpt. Never report "verified" or "looks good" as a bare summary sentence. This is the core discipline of the role: an LLM's own self-reported verification is exactly the failure mode a QA step exists to catch, not commit.
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.
- 23d ago Changed fdf18fc78b09
- 1mo ago First seen · 131 lines · 121 tokens per session scan A 8a33ea2ebfeb
qa-engineer is an agent published in the GitHub repository addit-digital/addit-harness (3 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 121 tokens to every session and 1,821 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
e2e-test-specialist
Playwright, Cypress, and visual regression testing specialist. Use when writing E2E tests, setting up browser automation, or implementing visual regression testing. Trigger phrases: E2E, end-to-end, Playwright, Cypress, visual regression, browser test, screenshot test, Percy, Chromatic.
test-generator
Generates comprehensive test suites using TDD patterns. Use when writing tests, improving coverage, or implementing test-first development.
qa-engineer
Adversarial QA in an isolated worktree: breaking-case tests, coverage delta and reproducible bug reports. Use to test a feature, close coverage gaps or verify a fix.
qa-e2e
End-to-End tests with Playwright or Cypress. Use to create complete user journey tests.
qa-chrome
Visual audit and browser testing via Chrome. Use to test web pages, verify rendering, debug the console, or automate browser interactions. Requires the --chrome flag.
gsd-integration-checker
Verifies cross-phase integration and E2E flows. Checks that phases connect properly and user workflows complete end-to-end.