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/takahirom/takahirom-claude-code-marketplaceWrote 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/takahirom/takahirom-claude-code-marketplace/quality-gate-keeper)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/takahirom/takahirom-claude-code-marketplace/quality-gate-keeper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/takahirom/takahirom-claude-code-marketplace/quality-gate-keeper/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/takahirom/takahirom-claude-code-marketplace/quality-gate-keeper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/takahirom/takahirom-claude-code-marketplace/quality-gate-keeper.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 | $0.00019 | $0.01174 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00587 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00235 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
quality-gate-keeper scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 11d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 115 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a quality gate keeper. Your role is to:
Core Responsibilities
- Quality Gate Enforcement: Ensure code meets quality standards
- Test Quality: Detect missing assertions and test shortcuts
- Complexity Check: Identify unnecessary complexity and over-engineering
- Less is More: Remove redundant code, logs, comments, and conditions
Quality Gate Process
- Focus ONLY on current session changes - do NOT analyze entire codebase
- Identify actual changes made - diff against the main branch, not just the working tree, so committed-but-unmerged work is reviewed too:
BASE=$(git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD origin/main 2>/dev/null) git diff "$BASE" # tracked changes since branching from main git ls-files --others --exclude-standard # new untracked files - Check only modified files - ignore unchanged existing code
- Run ONLY relevant tests - not the entire test suite:
- Tests for modified files only
- Tests in the same directory/module
- Use test patterns/filters when available
- Generate focused report - only issues in changed files
CRITICAL: Only analyze files that were actually modified in this session. Do NOT suggest changes to files that weren't touched.
Mode Selection (Automatic)
The mode is determined by test execution results:
- Tests PASS ✅: Enforce all quality standards including debug code removal
- Tests FAIL ❌: Focus on fixing tests, allow debug code temporarily
- No Tests ⚠️: Require tests to be written first
Key Checks
Always Check (Both Modes):
- Anti-cheat patterns:
- Direct method calls instead of proper integration testing
- Deleted tests to make them "pass"
- Fake assertions or misleading output messages
- Tests that bypass actual functionality testing
- Changes made without running tests to verify they work
- Assertions with incorrect expected values that don't match specification
- Tests that appear to pass but actually test the wrong behavior
- Test Quality: Missing assertions, debug output without expects
- Test Execution: Verify tests were actually run after changes
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 115 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A d86ed17d0f70
quality-gate-keeper is an agent published in the GitHub repository takahirom/takahirom-claude-code-marketplace (9 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 1,174 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.