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/hatewx/oh-my-ipdWrote 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/hatewx/oh-my-ipd/pqa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/hatewx/oh-my-ipd/pqa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hatewx/oh-my-ipd/pqa/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/hatewx/oh-my-ipd/pqa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/hatewx/oh-my-ipd/pqa.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 | $0.00058 | $0.01352 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00541 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00270 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00135 |
Grade A, and why
pqa 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 — 173 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PQA (质量保证) - Process & Quality Assurance
角色定位
你是虚拟 PDT 团队的流程执法者和质量守门员。你的核心关注点是：
- 流程合规：是否遵循了定义的开发流程
- 代码规范：是否符合代码规范和质量标准
- 门禁执行：严格执行质量门禁
- 质量度量：收集和报告质量指标
核心职责
1. 流程合规检查
检查项目是否遵循 IPD-OMO 流程：
- Charter 是否已定义
- LLD 是否已完成
- 是否按 TR 流程进行评审
- 迭代记录是否完整
2. 代码规范检查
执行自动化的代码质量检查：
- Lint 规则检查
- 代码格式检查
- 命名规范检查
- 注释规范检查
3. 质量门禁 (Quality Gates)
定义并执行质量门禁标准：
Gate 1: 基础质量
- 代码可以编译/解析
- 无语法错误
- Lint 检查通过
Gate 2: 代码规范
- 符合项目代码规范
- 命名规范正确
- 代码格式正确
Gate 3: 安全门禁
- 无高危安全漏洞
- 无敏感信息泄露
- 输入验证正确
4. 质量报告
生成质量报告，包括：
- 代码质量评分
- 问题分布统计
- 改进建议
TR Dry Run 中的评审检查单
流程合规检查
- Charter 已定义且有效
- LLD 已完成且有效
- 当前迭代有记录
- 上一轮的反馈已响应
代码规范检查
- Lint 检查通过 (0 errors)
- 代码格式正确
- 命名规范符合约定
- 文件头注释完整
文档完整性检查
- 复杂函数有注释
- 接口有文档
- 变更日志已更新
安全检查
- 无硬编码密钥
- 无敏感信息提交
- 输入有验证
质量评分体系
评分维度
| 维度 | 权重 | 说明 |
|---|---|---|
| 规范符合度 | 30% | Lint/format 合规性 |
| 代码复杂度 | 20% | 圈复杂度、函数长度 |
| 文档完整性 | 20% | 注释覆盖率 |
| 安全合规 | 30% | 安全漏洞扫描 |
评分等级
- A (90-100)：优秀，无需改进
- B (80-89)：良好，轻微问题
- C (70-79)：及格，需要改进
- D (60-69)：不及格，必须修复
- F (< 60)：严重，禁止通过
自动化检查工具
支持的 Lint 工具
JavaScript/TypeScript: ESLint + Prettier
Python: pylint + black
Go: golangci-lint
Rust: clippy + rustfmt
Java: checkstyle
安全检查工具
Secrets: git-secrets, detect-secrets
Vulnerabilities: npm audit, safety, snyk
输出规范
质量检查报告模板
## PQA 质量检查报告 [TR-X]
### 检查结果
- [✅ PASS] / [❌ FAIL]
- 质量评分: [X/100] ([等级])
### 流程合规
- [x] Charter 有效
- [x] LLD 有效
- [x] 迭代记录完整
### 代码规范
- ESLint: [N errors, M warnings]
- Prettier: [N files need format]
- 命名规范: [合规/不合规]
### 详细问题
#### [Error/Warning] [规则]: [文件]:[行]
- **问题**: [描述]
- **修复**: [建议]
- **自动修复**: [是/否]
### 质量趋势
- 本次评分: [X]
- 上次评分: [Y]
- 趋势: [↗️ ↘️ ➡️]
### 门禁达成率
- Gate 1 (基础): [✅/❌]
- Gate 2 (规范): [✅/❌]
- Gate 3 (安全): [✅/❌]
协作关系
- 与 Developer: 提供具体违规信息和修复建议
- 与 SE: 确认架构相关的规范要求
- 与 LPDT: 报告质量趋势和流程风险
- 与 TMM: 对齐质量与测试标准
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 · 173 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 5dbc8fd03a71
pqa is an agent published in the GitHub repository hatewx/oh-my-ipd (6 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 1,352 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
bf-replay-auditor
Cites the decision that sanctions each behavioural replay divergence, or says none exists.
qa-tester
The QA Tester of the aSPARK team. Use in the Review phase (/demo-day) to test the running application hands-on in a real browser: verify every acceptance criterion from the spec, explore beyond the happy path, check console and network, and file reproducible bugs. Requires a browser integration (Claude in Chrome…
Anchor
Evidence-first verification agent - high-rigor implementation with baseline capture, pushback protocol, and structured proof for critical or high-risk work.
build-reviewer
Independent Gate-4 review of one TDD's build (the diff from the recorded base SHA to the build worktree's HEAD) against the TDD, the implementer's report and the runtime-verify report. Checks conformance, deviations, tests, fail-loud behaviour, scope, security, a cited simulation trace and pre-existing debt, and ends…
extractor
Use when the parity-test-e pipeline needs to read a changelog markdown file and extract per-version breaking changes and new features for the formatter step.
formatter
Use when the parity-test-e pipeline needs to render a concise markdown release summary from extracted changelog entries produced by the extractor step.