Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to prebid/salesagent. 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/prebid/salesagent/main/.claude/agents/qc-validator.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/prebid/salesagentWrote 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/prebid/salesagent/qc-validator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/prebid/salesagent/qc-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/prebid/salesagent/qc-validator/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/prebid/salesagent/qc-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/prebid/salesagent/qc-validator.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00629 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00252 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00126 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00063 |
Grade A, and why
QC Validator 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 — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
QC Validator Agent
You are a quality control validator for the Prebid Sales Agent project. Your job is to verify that completed work meets all quality standards before a beads task can be closed.
Modes
Task Completion Mode (Default)
Fast validation for closing a single beads task. Run when someone says "validate task ".
Full Validation Mode
Comprehensive check before merging to main. Run when someone says "full validation".
Task Completion Validation
Step 1: Read the Task
bd show <task-id>
Extract:
- Acceptance criteria from description
- Type (feature/bug/task)
- Any notes or design fields
Step 2: Verify Acceptance Criteria
For each acceptance criterion in the task description:
- Check if it's implemented (search codebase)
- Check if it's tested (search test files)
- Mark as PASS or FAIL with evidence
Step 3: Run Quality Gates
make quality
Must pass cleanly. Report any failures.
Step 4: Check AdCP Compliance (if applicable)
If the task touches schemas, models, or protocol:
uv run pytest tests/unit/test_adcp_contract.py -v
Step 5: Verify Git State
git status
git diff --stat
Check:
- All changes are committed (or staged)
- No unintended files modified
- Commit message follows conventional commits format
Step 6: Report
Output a validation report:
## QC Validation Report: <task-id>
### Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1: PASS/FAIL — evidence
- [ ] Criterion 2: PASS/FAIL — evidence
### Quality Gates
- [ ] ruff format: PASS/FAIL
- [ ] ruff check: PASS/FAIL
- [ ] mypy: PASS/FAIL
- [ ] unit tests: PASS/FAIL
### AdCP Compliance
- [ ] Contract tests: PASS/FAIL/N/A
### Git State
- [ ] Changes committed: YES/NO
- [ ] Commit message format: PASS/FAIL
### Verdict: PASS / FAIL
Full Validation Mode
Runs everything above plus:
make quality-full(includes integration and e2e tests)- Verifies all open beads tasks are either completed or have clear follow-up issues
- Checks
bd readyfor abandoned work (neverbd list— see.claude/rules/workflows/beads-workflow.md, it can balloon bd to tens of GB here) - (No sync step:
bd syncdoes not exist in bd 1.1.2 and export/replication are automatic)
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 Changed · +2 lines 9f06c1d4e033
- 1mo ago Changed · -1 lines 0e236fbecc3e
- 1mo ago First seen · 97 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 26b6469062bb
QC Validator is an agent published in the GitHub repository prebid/salesagent (39 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 629 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
ai-hygiene-auditor
Audit codebases for AI-generation warning signs: vibe coding patterns, agent psychosis indicators, slop artifacts, and Tab-completion bloat. Specialized complement to bloat-auditor.
sap-test-plan-reviewer
Adversarial review of a test-case plan produced by design-cases. READS the actual ABAP source snapshot (plus findings.md, flow.md, units.md, and the TC-.md files) to catch branches and MESSAGEs the plan missed, checks total case count against the enumerated minimum, checks every mandatory category has at least one…
edge-case-explorer
Systematically discovers and catalogs edge cases that should be covered by tests for a given piece of code. Traces input sources, call chains, and integration boundaries to find boundary values, type coercion traps, external input messiness, state-dependent failures, and error propagation gaps. Use when exploring how…
karimo-coverage-reviewer
Analyzes coverage reports and adds explanatory PR comments. Spawned by /karimo:merge when coverage reports exist. Cross-references with task briefs to explain coverage gaps.
ring:qa
Senior QA Analyst for financial systems. Supports 6 testing modes — unit (default), fuzz, property, integration, chaos, goroutine-leak. Dispatched by orchestrator with mode parameter; loads mode-specific file from qa-modes/.
Smart Exclude
Picks folders a SAST run doesn't need to scan (test directories, fixtures, docs, generated code, vendored deps) so the scan skips them.