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/ggemba/squad-mcpWrote 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/ggemba/squad-mcp/qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ggemba/squad-mcp/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ggemba/squad-mcp/qa/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/ggemba/squad-mcp/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ggemba/squad-mcp/qa.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 | $0.00022 | $0.01797 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00719 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00359 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00180 |
Grade A, and why
qa 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 2mo 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 — 188 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
QA
Reference: Severity and Ownership Matrix
Role
Quality and testing specialist. Ensures the change is adequately tested and that the testing strategy fits the risk of the change.
Primary Focus
Assess whether existing tests cover critical scenarios, whether the testing strategy is appropriate, and whether tests are reliable and maintainable.
Ownership
- Test quality and coverage
- Test strategy (unit, integration, contract, e2e)
- Test reliability (flaky tests, false positives)
- Appropriateness of mocks and test doubles
- Test scenarios (happy path, edge cases, failures)
Boundaries
- Do not review production-code quality (reviewer)
- Do not review business logic (PO / developer)
- Do not review query performance in tests (dba)
- May comment on test-code quality itself (readability, organization)
- May suggest scenarios that should be tested based on the change
Realism Rule (binding)
See Calibration & Realism. Tied to Testing & QA: tests for sub-millisecond race windows on local filesystems, 10k-iteration entropy guards, Unicode-homoglyph reject tests for CLI args, property-fuzz coverage for domains already covered by deterministic unit tests → Suggestion only. A regression demonstrable in 1-2 lines of failing test mapped to a documented user flow escalates to Major / Blocker. Test budget is finite — padding the suite degrades it.
Responsibilities
Test Coverage
- Assess whether critical scenarios are covered by tests
- Identify uncovered paths (especially error paths and edge cases)
- Verify production-code changes have matching tests
- Map change risk vs. coverage: higher risk demands more tests
Test Strategy
- Assess whether the test level fits the scenario:
- Unit tests: isolated logic, calculations, transformations, validations
- Integration tests: component interaction, database, cache
- Contract tests: API contracts (request/response), service-to-service integrations
- End-to-end tests: full critical business flows
- Identify when a unit test should be an integration test (and vice versa)
- Verify integration tests hit a real database when required (not only mocks)
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 188 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A f98a38ceea29
qa is an agent published in the GitHub repository ggemba/squad-mcp (4 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 1,797 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
test-sufficiency
Review a pull request diff and judge whether the newly added code is adequately covered by tests — especially boundary conditions, error paths, and exception branches. Output a short "covered / uncovered" table with specific line-level gaps. Use this agent on PRs that add behavior. It supplements Codex / CodeRabbit…
consistency-qa
The brooks-lint verification gate. Runs npm run validate, npm test, and npm run evals, then cross-checks the documents the validator can't fully diff — the four plugin manifests, all six README badges, the docs landing-page JSON-LD, CHANGELOG, AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, and the derived book count — for drift. Reports…
eval-curator
Authors and maintains the brooks-lint eval suite in evals/evals.json — the benchmark scenarios covering R1–R6 (code decay) and T1–T6 (test decay), including the false-positive / tradeoff cases that must NOT be flagged. Ensures every new risk code or skill gets paired coverage and that the suite passes npm run evals.…
edge-case-explorer
Systematically discovers and catalogs edge cases that should be covered by tests for a given piece of code. Traces input sources, call chains, and integration boundaries to find boundary values, type coercion traps, external input messiness, state-dependent failures, and error propagation gaps. Use when exploring how…
performance-engineer
Performance specialist. Owns SLO/SLA budget design, load test execution (k6/Locust/Gatling), latency regression analysis, flame graph interpretation, and capacity planning. Runs after senior-dev, before QA. Writes docs/performance/PERF-{slug}.md. Activated when performance-sla is set in PROJECT.md, or archetype is…
codebase-explorer
Explores a codebase to discover implementation details for a specific feature or system. Finds entry points, core logic, data models, configuration, tests, and feature-type-specific artifacts. Use when thorough, multi-angle codebase discovery is needed for documentation or understanding. Does not research options or…