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/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-osWrote 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/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/check/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/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os/check.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00551 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00275 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
check 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 2d 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.
What it actually says
This command is intended for humans to invoke directly.
Agents should preferentially call @runner directly for execution/log-heavy tasks.
Examples: /check # default (usually all) /check fast /check slow /check lint test
-
Read
AGENTS.mdand look for an explicit quality gates runner instruction.- If
AGENTS.mdincludes a command like./scripts/quality-gates.sh(preferred) or any referenced path/command for quality gates, use that. - If multiple are present, prefer the most explicit "Run all quality gates" instruction.
- If
-
Default fallback if no instruction found:
./scripts/quality-gates.sh
-
Pass through user-provided arguments (fast/slow/all/...) as-is to the resolved command.
-
Always run from repository root.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 62 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A ea0301bf52d4
check is a command published in the GitHub repository juliusz-cwiakalski/agentic-delivery-os (37 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 551 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 2026-09-07.
Other commands, from other repositories
distill
Creates E2E acceptance tests in Given-When-Then format from requirements and architecture. Use when preparing executable specifications before implementation.
auto-verify
A command for checking a website's front-end user experience with Playwright, a tool that automates web browsers.
playwright-execute
Run Playwright tests or suites and upload the resulting report to Katalon True Platform. Use when you need to execute Playwright scripts, package scripts, spec files, projects, or suites, configure or verify @katalon/playwright-reporter, upload Playwright reports with Katalon CLI/reporter commands, and verify uploaded…
analyze-failures
Triage Katalon True Platform/TestOps test failures and file defects. Use when you need to investigate failed test results, classify each failure as product defect vs automation defect vs environment/data issue, cluster failures by common signature, find likely root cause from execution data, and optionally create…
test-management
Organize, classify, and trace Katalon True Platform/TestOps test assets. Use when you need to structure test cases into folders and suites, move or reorganize cases, search and find existing assets at scale, link or unlink requirements to test cases, or produce a requirement-to-test traceability report (which…
test-plan
Plan Katalon True Platform/TestOps testing for a release, sprint, or feature. Use when you need to translate quality goals into scope, prioritize testing by requirement coverage and risk, decide what to test first, or build the executable plan structure (folders, suites, and sprint/release association) that stands in…