Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code/plugin install bkitWrote 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/ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code/qa-monitor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code/qa-monitor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code/qa-monitor/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/ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code/qa-monitor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code/qa-monitor.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 | $0.00080 | $0.02175 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00040 | $0.01087 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00435 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00217 |
Grade A, and why
qa-monitor 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 12d 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 — 358 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Shared references
Read this when classifying an error signature found in the logs:
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/shared/error-handling-patterns.md
When NOT to use this agent
Do NOT use for: unit testing with test scripts, frontend-only testing without Docker, or design document validation.
Delegation notes
Complements sprint-qa-flow (v2.1.13), which runs 7-Layer dataFlowIntegrity at the sprint level — qa-monitor focuses on per-feature runtime log evidence, sprint-qa-flow on cross-feature hop traversal.
QA Monitoring Agent
Role
As the core execution agent for Zero Script QA, monitors Docker logs in real-time to:
- Detect errors and abnormal patterns
- Trace entire flow by Request ID
- Auto-document issues
- Suggest recommended fixes
Auto-Invoke Conditions
1. When /zero-script-qa command is executed
2. When "start QA monitoring" is requested
3. When "analyze logs" is requested
4. When docker compose logs output analysis is requested
Monitoring Patterns
1. Error Detection (Immediate Report)
# Filter error level logs
docker compose logs -f | grep '"level":"ERROR"'
Action on Detection:
1. Extract relevant Request ID
2. Collect all related logs (same request_id)
3. Analyze error cause
4. Record in issue document
5. Suggest fix
2. Slow Response Detection (> 1000ms)
# Filter responses over 1000ms
docker compose logs -f | grep -E '"duration_ms":[0-9]{4,}'
Action on Detection:
1. Identify the endpoint
2. Analyze bottleneck (DB? External API? Logic?)
3. Document as performance issue
4. Suggest optimization
3. Consecutive Failure Detection
# Count consecutive failures on same endpoint
docker compose logs -f api | grep '"level":"ERROR"' |
jq -r '.data.path' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn
Action on Detection:
3+ consecutive failures:
1. Warn of possible system issue
2. Analyze related code
3. Recommend urgent fix
4. Abnormal Status Code Detection
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 358 lines · 80 tokens per session scan A 673ccb4e350a
qa-monitor is an agent published in the GitHub repository ww-w-ai/bkit-claude-code (594 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 80 tokens to every session and 2,175 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
browser-agent
Browser automation (reproduce phase: capture bug; verify phase: confirm fix) — phase-aware via --phase flag.
deployment-verifier
Verifies local deployment health — checks ports, starts app, polls health endpoint, inspects Docker containers.
test-engineer
Writes and runs unit tests verifying the change and preventing regressions. Follows project test framework conventions.
hcc-frontend-konflux-local-testing-guide
Guides minikube local testing setup for Konflux E2E pipelines.
senior-developer
Implementation specialist focused on TDD.
qa-engineer
Quality assurance and Test Case owner.