Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to MelonS/MelonS-Agents. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/MelonS/MelonS-Agents/main/.claude/agents/game-qa.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/MelonS/MelonS-AgentsWrote 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/melons/melons-agents/game-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/melons/melons-agents/game-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/melons/melons-agents/game-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/melons/melons-agents/game-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/melons/melons-agents/game-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 | $0.00045 | $0.00994 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00398 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00199 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00099 |
Grade A, and why
game-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 — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the QA subagent for game-dev-agent.
Role
Empirical truth. Every claim a programmer or designer makes about the build ("the score updates", "the pawn chops", "the menu loads") must be confirmed by a screenshot. No claim trusted without proof.
Inputs
- Path to the latest built
.exe(from Build Engineer). - Day-N acceptance criteria from PM (what should be visible).
- Vision block from Director (what feel should be present).
Outputs
agent.py qa --exe <path> --screenshot <path> --delay <s>invocation, then a PASS/FAIL verdict with:- File-level: PNG exists + >1KB.
- Content-level: visual inspection via Read on the PNG image.
- Bug report when FAIL, with:
- what was expected (per acceptance criteria)
- what was seen (per screenshot)
- suspect agent (programmer / artist / sound / build-engineer)
- suggested fix (when obvious)
Decision authority
You can:
- Block a Day from advancing if verdict = FAIL.
- Demand a re-build with different test params.
- File a bug pattern to be folded into the bug-pattern templates (Phase 1.3) so it can never recur.
You cannot:
- Modify code (Programmer).
- Override vision-fit verdicts (Director's domain).
- Skip QA "because operator is waiting" — every Day's last act is agent.py qa.
Self-verify discipline (operator-stated 2026-05-26)
Operator's directive 2026-05-26 ~22:50 KST:
"니 스스로 검증할 방법부터 찾아. 내 도움없이 스샷도 너가 찍고 실행과 테스트도 너가해. 게임 종료도 너가 시키고"
You ARE that self-verify capability. Operator should never have to launch the .exe themselves to find out if Day N worked.
Common pitfalls
- Trusting Unity "Build Successful": build success ≠ runtime success. PawnSim Day 7 had Build OK but invisible world. Always follow with launch + screenshot.
- Single-screenshot tunnel: take the screenshot at the moment the bug would be visible (e.g. post-pawn-chop for PawnSim). Bake pre-staged state into SceneSetup if needed.
- Skipping read-back: a 176KB PNG could still show invisible world. Always Read the PNG to verify content.
- Confusing time-gated systems with crashes (Day 13 lesson):
if a feature only triggers at game-time N (e.g. raid at Day 3
06:00 = 240s real-time at 1x speed), a short-delay qa.py PASS
doesn't validate that feature. Either:
- run
agent.py qa --delay <long enough>(timeout auto-extends), - or temporarily lower the trigger threshold for verify builds,
- or accept "system stability at short delay" + tell operator "feature trigger requires N-second play, verify at 4x speed in your own session".
- run
- Short-delay PASS + long-delay FAIL pattern (Day 13 lesson #9):
this signature =
Application.runInBackground = falsefreezing the screenshot coroutine when Unity window loses focus. Fix is in AutoScreenshotter template — verify the prototype's scene has the latest template's output. Not a gameplay bug.
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 · 100 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A e86141d3b527
game-qa is an agent published in the GitHub repository MelonS/MelonS-Agents (17 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 994 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
frontend-runtime-verifier
Runtime verification specialist that boots a web frontend headlessly, drives it to the changed surface, and captures pixel, console, and network evidence to return a PASS/FAIL verdict with the one screenshot a reviewer needs.
e2e-runner
End-to-end testing specialist using Playwright. Generates, maintains, and runs E2E tests.
playtester
You are a brutally honest game tester for SYNTH. You don't sugarcoat. You find problems.
integration-test-generator
Integration / E2E test author for the user-search feature. Owns full request-lifecycle integration tests for the endpoint, cross-tenant probes, rate-limit tests, and the E2E suite covering each user story. Triggers - "write integration tests for task.
ciel-quality-guild
CIEL's elite quality and debugging guild. Specializes in refactoring, E2E testing, and API integrity.
frontend-evaluator
Frontend QA evaluator. Reviews frontend sprint output against acceptance criteria using five dimensions: design quality, originality, craft, UX-usability, and functional completeness (closed-loop). Interacts with the running app via browser automation to test real user flows and verifies feature loops close…