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/gracefullight/krdsWrote 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/gracefullight/krds/qa-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/gracefullight/krds/qa-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gracefullight/krds/qa-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/gracefullight/krds/qa-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gracefullight/krds/qa-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 | $0.00016 | $0.00485 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00194 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00097 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
qa-reviewer 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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 · 71 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A f84f04d2827a
qa-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository gracefullight/krds (46 stars, last pushed 24d ago), with no licence file. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 485 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 2026-09-01.
Other agents, from other repositories
muriel-forger
Forger juror seat for a muriel jury. Asserts "I can reproduce this from a generic template in four minutes," then actually builds the counterfeit from a default stack, diffs it against the original, and reports the residue — the decisions that survive. Judges one thing only, distinguishability from competent generic…
wa-reviewer
Reviews web-architect builds against 5-dimension quality rubric. Scores, reports findings, and extracts self-improvement learnings. Read-only — does not fix code.
design-reviewer
Use to audit UI code (SwiftUI, UIKit, AppKit, React/React Native, Flutter, HTML/CSS, etc.) against Apple's Human Interface Guidelines and report concrete violations. Invoke when the user asks to review/check/audit a screen, view, component, or stylesheet for HIG compliance, accessibility, or design-token correctness …
ui-auditor
A user-interface audit agent that reviews UI changes and checks them against an external set of design and engineering rules. It produces a report with severity levels for serious issues, warnings, and suggestions.
atelier-ship-reviewer
Atelier suite ship gate + adversarial reviewer (Opus). Owns the SHIP half of the image-first pipeline: hardens the build for the real world (atelier-harden — text overflow, i18n/RTL, error/empty/edge states), runs the performance + accessibility GATE (atelier-perf-a11y — Core Web Vitals, WCAG 2.2 AA…
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.