Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to spica-engine/spica. 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/spica-engine/spica/master/.claude/agents/qa.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/spica-engine/spicaWrote 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/spica-engine/spica/qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/spica-engine/spica/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spica-engine/spica/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/spica-engine/spica/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/spica-engine/spica/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 | $0.00048 | $0.00890 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00356 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00178 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00089 |
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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed AGPL-3.0
The repository is licensed AGPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
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 · 92 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A f3b3b4968306
qa is an agent published in the GitHub repository spica-engine/spica (101 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed AGPL-3.0. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 890 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 2026-09-01.
Other agents, from other repositories
tdd-test-writer-agent
Writes failing unit tests (RED phase of TDD) for igniteui-angular features and bug fixes. Creates tests before any production code exists.
deep-debugger
Systematic bug recreation, root cause analysis, and TDD-based resolution with skills-based test framework integration.
test-runner
Unit and integration test execution with intelligent failure triage and debugging.
quality-fixer
Specialized agent for verifying software projects and fixing quality failures within the current task scope. Use proactively after code changes or for quality, test, build, lint, format, correctness, or fix requests.
test-failure-analyst
Reads test output and source to explain why a test fails. Use after a failing test run.
mb-debugger
Systematic-debugging specialist for memory-bank. Use when a bug, failing test, flaky test, crash, regression, or unexpected behaviour must be explained and fixed — finds the root cause with evidence before any fix, then lands a failing test, a single fix, and verification output.