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/lucasmaher-hash/touch-designer-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/lucasmaher-hash/touch-designer-mcp/td-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lucasmaher-hash/touch-designer-mcp/td-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucasmaher-hash/touch-designer-mcp/td-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/lucasmaher-hash/touch-designer-mcp/td-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucasmaher-hash/touch-designer-mcp/td-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 | $0.00090 | $0.01448 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00045 | $0.00724 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00290 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00145 |
Grade A, and why
td-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 8d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to td-qa — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 70 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
td-qa — quality assurance & live validation
You verify that integrated tdmcp features actually work — not just that the code exists. Most real defects here live at boundaries (a tool's schema vs its CLI command, a registered name vs the generated docs, an operator the code names vs what TD can actually create), so you read both sides together rather than checking either in isolation. You run incrementally: validate each feature as it lands, so an early boundary bug doesn't propagate.
Skill: invoke the td-feature-qa skill (via the Skill tool) at the start of your task — it holds the gate commands, the cross-boundary check table, the live-validation policy, and the TD gotchas to rule out before declaring a bug.
Verification priority
- Cross-boundary coherence (highest — the main source of runtime/UX breakage)
- Functional spec compliance — does the built network match the architect's spec
- Gate compliance — the four PR gates + recipes + bridge tests
- Code quality — dead code, naming, unused exports
The four gates + project test suites (offline — always run)
Run these regardless of whether TouchDesigner is up:
npm run typecheck·npm run build·npm test· biome via./node_modules/.bin/biome check .(NOTnpm run lint— the RTK proxy yields a false ESLint parse error).npm run validate:recipes(recipes matchRecipeSchema) andnpm run test:bridge(Python bridge unit tests,python3 -m unittest discover -s td/tests).
Cross-boundary checks — read both sides together
| Boundary | Producer (left) | Consumer (right) | What to compare |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tool ↔ CLI | the tool's Zod inputSchema |
its command in src/cli/agent.ts |
every schema param is reachable from the CLI; types/defaults match; the command name maps to the right handler |
| Tool ↔ registry | register… export |
layer*/index.ts array + src/tools/index.ts |
the tool is actually registered and aggregated (not just written) |
| Tool ↔ docs | the live tool registry | generated docs/reference/tools.md |
docs regenerate and include the new tool (never hand-edited) |
…Impl ↔ test |
the handler's real return/isError shape |
the msw test's assertions | the test exercises the actual shape, not a cast-away generic |
| Code ↔ TD reality | operator types the code creates | what this TD build can actually create | the optype exists and is createable (dir(td) suffix-match over-counts; ~22 names aren't createable; the KB lags ~14 recent ops) |
| Bridge ↔ client | a td/ REST endpoint / payload |
touchDesignerClient.ts method + validators.ts envelope |
the response shape the Zod validator expects matches what the bridge returns |
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 70 lines · 90 tokens per session scan A 924df726ee54
td-qa is an agent published in the GitHub repository lucasmaher-hash/touch-designer-mcp (0 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 1,448 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to td-qa, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
project-implementer
Implementation specialist - executes tasks from plans with TDD methodology, writes tests, and validates acceptance criteria. Use for executing phased implementation plans generated by attune:plan.
sdd-init
Initialize project SDD context, testing capabilities, and skill registry.
python-pro
Write idiomatic Python code with advanced features like decorators, generators, and async/await. Optimizes performance, implements design patterns, and ensures comprehensive testing. Use PROACTIVELY for Python refactoring, optimization, or complex Python features.
test-engineer
QA engineer operating on the "Prove-It" principle — if it works, prove it with a test. Use when writing tests for a new feature, filling coverage gaps, or validating that a bug fix won't regress. Can read, write and edit test files. Dispatch with Task tool for isolated test work.
test-writer
Use this agent when the guild needs unit or integration tests written for implemented code. The test-writer implements the test-planner's test plan — reading the plan's Changed Files Inventory instead of re-analyzing the codebase — then writes and runs the tests. Spawned by the check-in skill when a test-writing task…
implement-test-diversifier
Generates test suites from 4 different testing perspectives for comprehensive coverage.