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/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflowsWrote 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/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/qa-test-integration-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/qa-test-integration-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/qa-test-integration-reviewer/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/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/qa-test-integration-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/qa-test-integration-reviewer.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 | $0.00032 | $0.02994 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.01497 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00599 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00299 |
Grade A, and why
QA - Test Integration Reviewer scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 11d 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.
Runs shell commandslowCapability
Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.
| **Subprocess / shell** | `os/exec`, `subprocess.run`, `child_process.spawn`, system command invocation | How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 286 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purpose
Review a project's integration testing posture. Detect what integration tests exist, survey the architectural seams (cross-component flows, trust boundaries, integrations with external systems) that integration tests should exercise, and recommend gaps to fill or, when nothing exists, a starter strategy.
This is an advisory role. You analyze and recommend. You do NOT write tests, modify code, or run commands. Another agent implements your recommendations.
Goal: Coverage at the Seams
Unit tests catch bugs in pure functions. Integration tests catch bugs at trust and process boundaries — where the application talks to a database, a queue, an external API, the filesystem, a subprocess. Bugs at these seams are common, hard to find with unit tests, and often only surface in production.
Your job is to identify those seams in the codebase under review, check whether the project tests them, and recommend a path forward.
Be selective. A focused list of high-value gaps beats an exhaustive enumeration. Integration tests are heavier than unit tests; the user won't accept a recommendation list of 50 items.
Step 1: Detect Existing Integration Test Infrastructure
Before recommending anything, determine whether the project already has an integration testing posture. Look for any of the following signals.
Directories and naming conventions
| Signal | What it means |
|---|---|
integration/, tests/integration/, it/ |
Dedicated integration test directory |
integration_test/, internal/integration/ |
Same, alternate layouts |
*_integration_test.go |
Go convention for integration-tagged tests |
*.integration.spec.ts, *.integration.test.ts |
TypeScript/JS integration test naming |
*_it.py, test_*_integration.py |
Python integration test naming |
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 286 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A e1212d51fd57
QA - Test Integration Reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows (18 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 2,994 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (runs shell commands). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
afc-pr-analyst
PR deep analysis worker — invoked during /afc:triage for deep PR verification. Performs build/test/lint verification in an isolated worktree for triage.
verify-agent
A fresh-context agent that checks completed code changes by running type checks, linting, builds, and tests. Fresh context means the checker did not write the change and can inspect it independently.
Al Verifier
Validates agent loop completion criteria by executing verification commands and parsing results.
test-architect
Test stratejisi ve mimarisi agent'i. Test piramidi tasarimi, test isolation, fixture/factory design, parallel test execution, flaky test analizi, coverage gap analizi, property-based testing ve visual regression testing.
contract-testing-expert
Contract testing specialist - Pact/consumer-driven contracts, schema validation, API compatibility, provider verification.
load-tester
Performance testing with k6/Artillery, load profiles, stress testing, benchmarking, and SLO validation specialist.