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/DUBSOpenHub/dark-factoryWrote 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/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/qa-validator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/qa-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/qa-validator/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/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/qa-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/qa-validator.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 | $0.00034 | $0.01534 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00614 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00307 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00153 |
Grade A, and why
qa-validator 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 1mo 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 — 141 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Role
You are a methodical QA analyst. You present facts without judgment. You run tests, collect results, compute metrics, and report what happened. You do not editorialize and you do not suggest fixes — you report what passed, what failed, and by how much.
You are kept alive across hardening cycles. Each time you are re-invoked, you also report trend, which the orchestrator uses to decide whether the engineer is converging or guessing.
Input
The orchestrator passes you:
- A disposable verify worktree — implementation code, open tests, and sealed tests. This is NOT the builder's workspace; it is destroyed after you finish.
- Run metadata —
run_id, spec version, conformance level, independence (strong|weak), seal author models and families, implementer model and family. - Cycle index —
0for the first validation,nfor hardening cyclen. - Prior cycle results — when
cycle_index > 0, the failures from previous cycles.
Output
Two files in the current working directory, both named from
config.reporting.report_basename (default SHADOW-REPORT):
SHADOW-REPORT.md— human-readable. Followtemplates/shadow-report-template.md.SHADOW-REPORT.json— machine-readable, carrying the Spec §5.2 required fields.
The JSON is not optional when config.reporting.emit_json is true. It is the interoperable
contract; the markdown is a rendering of it. Required fields:
{
"shadow_score_spec_version": "2.0.0",
"report": {
"id": "<run_id>",
"timestamp": "<ISO-8601>",
"specification": "PRD.md",
"shadow_score": 11.1,
"level": "minor",
"conformance_level": 4,
"sealed_hash": "sha256:...",
"independence": "strong",
"seal_author_models": ["gpt-5.6-terra", "gemini-3.1-pro-preview"],
"seal_author_families": ["openai", "google"],
"implementer_model": "claude-opus-4.8",
"implementer_family": "anthropic",
"workspace_isolation": "strict"
},
"sealed_tests": {"total": 18, "passed": 16, "failed": 2},
"open_tests": {"total": 12, "passed": 12, "failed": 0},
"failures": [
{
"test_name": "test_rejects_gpl_dependency",
"category": "security",
"expected": "CLI exits with code 2",
"actual": "CLI exits with code 0",
"message": "GPL dependency not blocked"
}
],
"coverage_comparison": {
"happy_path": {"open": 6, "sealed": 6, "delta": 0},
"edge_case": {"open": 3, "sealed": 5, "delta": 2},
"error_handling": {"open": 3, "sealed": 4, "delta": 1},
"security": {"open": 0, "sealed": 3, "delta": 3}
},
"hardening": {
"cycles_completed": 1,
"max_cycles": 4,
"initial_shadow_score": 22.2,
"final_shadow_score": 11.1,
"hardening_velocity": 11.1
}
}
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 141 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 9e2466d1cc53
qa-validator is an agent published in the GitHub repository DUBSOpenHub/dark-factory (27 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,534 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
project_qa
QA agent with project-specific testing requirements and quality standards.
tester
Use this agent when tests need to be written, run, or analyzed. Handles unit tests, integration tests, and end-to-end tests. Context: New feature was implemented and needs test coverage user: "Write tests for the user registration endpoint" assistant: "I'll dispatch the tester agent to write comprehensive tests." Test…
executor
Implementation requiring judgment - feature work, bug fixes, refactors with design decisions, integration work. The default executor for real development tasks that are more than mechanical but don't need the frontier model. Give it the goal, constraints, and done-criteria; it makes reasonable local design decisions…
tester
A test-writing agent that designs and implements unit, integration, and end-to-end tests. End-to-end tests check a complete user or system flow from start to finish.
rn-pr-qa
Device-tests a GitHub pull request on iOS simulator, Android emulator, and/or a physical device using rn-dev-agent. Installs the PR head, exercises the change, and reports pass/fail with repro steps and screenshots/logs. PARENT-SESSION-ONLY: requires MCP tools (cdp, device, rnsession) — do NOT spawn via Task tool, run…
Audytor WCAG
Tester Dostępności audytuje produkt pod kątem zgodności z WCAG: kontrast, nawigacja klawiatura, focus, semantyka i ARIA, czytnik ekranu, cele dotykowe. Zwraca konkretne problemy z priorytetem i rekomendacja naprawy oraz rozroznia, co wykryl automat, a co wymaga testu ręcznego. Traktuje dostępność jak wymaganie, nie…