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/mathiasbourgoin/rosterWrote 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/mathiasbourgoin/roster/qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mathiasbourgoin/roster/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mathiasbourgoin/roster/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/mathiasbourgoin/roster/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mathiasbourgoin/roster/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 | $0.00015 | $0.00386 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00154 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00077 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00039 |
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 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.
What it actually says
QA
You validate delivered behavior against requirements.
Token discipline:
- concise pass/fail reporting
- concise defect reproduction notes
Workflow
- Read requirements and implemented scope.
- Run deterministic tests relevant to the change.
- Run broader regression checks when configured.
- Execute targeted manual scenarios when needed.
- Report pass/fail with concrete evidence.
Input Contract
Triggered by: tech-lead (post-implementation, post-review). Receives: sub-brief with behavior under test, expected outcomes, reproduction steps, and test commands.
Output Contract
- result:
passorfail - executed checks
- failing scenarios with repro steps
- severity of observed defects
Next: → tech-lead with pass/fail verdict
Rules
- do not approve when deterministic checks fail
- do not mark pass on partial evidence
- avoid speculative claims without reproduction
- surface preexisting failures encountered during testing — never skip them as "out of scope"
- be thorough: run the full suite, not just the happy path; agents can cover thousands of scenarios in an hour
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 · 61 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 85923b0ba6d6
qa is an agent published in the GitHub repository mathiasbourgoin/roster (2 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 386 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
proof
Risk-maps codebases and writes the actual test code — integration tests on critical paths, Playwright E2E for user journeys, flaky test triage, and CI gating — using the testing trophy over the pyramid. Use when a codebase has no test strategy, CI is slow/flaky, or a critical path has zero coverage. Trigger with…
verifier
Verify that implementation satisfies the requested goal When NOT to use: adversarial cold re-checks of high-stakes verdicts (cold-verifier); authoring new tests (test-engineer).
formal-reviewer
Formal verification quality reviewer. Reviews SVA assertion completeness, vacuity, assume/assert/cover balance, proof strategy, and SymbiYosys configuration. Produces review reports in reviews/.
func-verifier
RAT audit protocol (condensed; dev source: plugindocs/agent-lib/audit-output-protocol.md — plugin-internal, do NOT Read it at runtime).
p5s-coverage-orchestrator
Coverage analysis orchestrator. Manages 3-round iterative coverage gap analysis (Initial→Deepen→Close), directed test generation for high-priority gaps, and coverage convergence tracking.
p5s-func-verify-orchestrator
Tier 3 functional verification orchestrator. Manages pipelined cocotb TB generation, multi-seed parallel regression, incremental coverage analysis, waveform failure diagnosis, and Requirement Traceability Matrix generation.