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/jonase47/ccprWrote 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/commands/jonase47/ccpr/gate-p6-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/jonase47/ccpr/gate-p6-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jonase47/ccpr/gate-p6-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/commands/jonase47/ccpr/gate-p6-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/jonase47/ccpr/gate-p6-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 | $0.00000 | $0.00974 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00390 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00195 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00097 |
Grade A, and why
gate-p6-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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 82 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/gate-p6-qa – QA Approval Evaluation
Evaluates all QA-relevant points of the Gate-P6 checklist and grants QA approval.
Argument: $ARGUMENTS = not applicable
Gate commands accept no arguments.
Prerequisites
docs/quality/QA.md(phase index) existsdocs/quality/FUNCTIONAL.md(sub-index) and its detail files (func_e2e.md,func_integration.md,func_regression.md)docs/quality/A11Y.md(sub-index) and its detail files (a11y_keyboard.md,a11y_screenreader.md,a11y_visual.md)docs/quality/EXPLORATORY.md(direct detail file)docs/architecture/TESTSTRATEGY.mdexists (as reference for critical paths)
Agent
- Type: qa-tester
- Model: sonnet
Pre-Flight
If docs/.gate-preflight-p6.md exists and is less than 10 minutes old, read it as a starting point. Mechanical checks (file existence, sections) are already done – focus on content evaluation.
Context (Orchestrator prepares)
Read the phase and sub-indexes first, then load detail files only when their status row signals an open issue:
- From
docs/quality/QA.md: status, key decisions, open risks (the entry points) - From
docs/quality/FUNCTIONAL.md(sub-index): row status of eachfunc_*.md - From
docs/quality/A11Y.md(sub-index): row status of eacha11y_*.md - From
docs/quality/EXPLORATORY.md: severity summary - From
docs/architecture/TESTSTRATEGY.md: critical test paths (short list) - Detail files (
func_e2e.md,a11y_visual.md, ...) only when a sub-index row isneeds-reworkor has an open Critical risk
Prompt Template
Goal: QA approval evaluation for Gate P6.
Test Protocols: [inline summaries]
Output Format:
Checklist (max. 8 points): | # | Check Point | Status | Justification | Status: Met / Partial / Not Met
QA Approval:
- Approved / Conditional Approval / Not Approved
- Justification (2–3 sentences)
- Conditions (if conditional, as numbered list)
Constraints:
- QA evaluation ONLY, NO security evaluation
- Evaluation based exclusively on available protocols
- No approval if critical bugs are open
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 d6362d1fb251
- 1mo ago Changed · +3 lines a0b959006774
- 1mo ago First seen · 79 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 663f14312a43
gate-p6-qa is a command published in the GitHub repository jonase47/ccpr (1 stars, last pushed 26d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 974 tokens. 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 commands, from other repositories
double-check
Comprehensive verification with automated quality gates, confession gathering, and confidence-based issue filtering. Default: self-review with gates. --deep: multi-agent review via code-reviewer agent. Use before committing, after fixing bugs, or to validate feature completeness.
playwright-setup
Verify Playwright CLI installation and create a .playwright/cli.config.json configuration file. Use when setting up browser automation, configuring Playwright, or user mentions "setup playwright", "configure browser testing", "install playwright".
test
Run the project test suite. Reports results to .claude/runtime/outputs/sse/test/.
eval
Pick the eval judge. local = fresh Claude evaluator (default). jev = Jev by TypeSafe AI, needs API key.
zeus
A command that runs an automated software-building pipeline from a one-line product description through planning, implementation, review, Docker setup, and testing.
ccc-audit
Audit the current project for dependency vulnerabilities, oversized bundles, type errors, dead code, hardcoded secrets, undocumented env vars and a missing CLAUDE.md. Use when you want a health score before a release or review.