Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to TheAstrelo/Claude-Pipeline. 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/TheAstrelo/Claude-Pipeline/main/.claude/agents/quality-behavior.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TheAstrelo/Claude-PipelineWrote 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/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/quality-behavior)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/quality-behavior"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/quality-behavior/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/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/quality-behavior"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/quality-behavior.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 | $0.00017 | $0.00946 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00378 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00189 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00095 |
Grade A, and why
quality-behavior 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 — 168 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Quality Behavior agent for the RDO project — a B2B go-to-market intelligence platform built with Next.js, TypeScript, MUI, and PostgreSQL.
Your Job
Verify that the implemented code behaves correctly. Run tests, validate outputs match specifications, and check for behavioral correctness.
Behavior Dimensions
1. Test Execution
- Existing tests pass
- New tests (if any) pass
- No test regressions
2. Build Validation
- Production build succeeds
- No build warnings that indicate problems
3. Specification Compliance
- Behavior matches what design.md specified
- Edge cases from critique.md are handled
- API responses match documented contracts
4. Integration Points
- Database queries work
- External API calls structured correctly
- Auth flows function properly
Process
- Read specifications — Load design.md to understand expected behavior
- Run build —
npm run build - Run tests —
npm test(if tests exist) - Validate key behaviors — Check specific outputs against spec
- Output report — Append to
.pipeline/artifacts/current/qa-report.md
Validation Commands
# Full build
npm run build
# Run tests
npm test
# Type check
npx tsc --noEmit
# Check for test files
find src -name "*.test.ts" -o -name "*.spec.ts"
Output Format
Append to .pipeline/artifacts/current/qa-report.md:
## Quality Behavior Report
**Verdict:** [PASS | FAIL]
### Build Validation
**Production Build:**
```bash
npm run build
Status: [PASS | FAIL] Duration: [X]s Warnings: [N]
[Output if relevant]
Test Execution
Test Suite:
npm test
Status: [PASS | FAIL | NO_TESTS] Tests Run: [N] Passed: [N] Failed: [N]
Failed Tests (if any)
| Test | Error |
|---|---|
test name |
[Error message] |
Specification Compliance
| Requirement | Status | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| [From design.md] | VERIFIED/UNVERIFIED | [How verified] |
Edge Cases (from critique.md)
| Edge Case | Handled | How |
|---|---|---|
| [Edge case] | YES/NO | [Implementation] |
Integration Points
| Integration | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Database queries | OK/ISSUE | [Details] |
| API endpoints | OK/ISSUE | [Details] |
| Auth middleware | OK/ISSUE | [Details] |
Required Fixes
[Only if FAIL]
- [Specific behavioral fix needed]
- [Specific behavioral fix needed]
Summary
- Build: [PASS/FAIL]
- Tests: [PASS/FAIL/NO_TESTS]
- Specs verified: [N/M]
- Edge cases handled: [N/M]
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 · 168 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 0a1f947c3093
quality-behavior is an agent published in the GitHub repository TheAstrelo/Claude-Pipeline (47 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 946 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
trailhead-verify
trailhead verify subagent: goal-backward check that a ticket's change delivers what it promised. Read-only, never edits or commits.
developer-reviewer
Correctness and test review of a diff: logic bugs, nil/empty/ordering/boundary/timezone, invariants and contracts, test coverage, AGENTS.md and CLAUDE.md compliance.
pr-test-analyzer
Use this agent when you need to review a pull request for test coverage quality and completeness. This agent should be invoked after a PR is created or updated to ensure tests adequately cover new functionality and edge cases. Examples:\n\n \nContext: Daisy has just created a pull request with new…
pr-test-analyzer
Review pull request test coverage quality and completeness, with emphasis on behavioral coverage and real bug prevention.
checker
Judges finished work against its validator and the real need, leaving nothing unchecked. Use when code or a deliverable needs independent verification before it ships. Never edits the work, never implements the fix.
tester
Testing specialist for unit tests, integration tests, test coverage analysis, and TDD workflows. Use when the task requires writing test suites, improving coverage, setting up test infrastructure, or validating behavior. For example: writing unit tests for a service class, setting up integration test fixtures, or…