Invoice Builder is an offline desktop application for creating, managing, and exporting invoices and quotations, with business data stored in a local database file. It is designed for freelancers, contractors, and small businesses that need local control of their invoicing data and PDF documents. The catalogue commands, agents, and instructions provide coding-agent workflows for working with the application.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to piratuks/invoice-builder. 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/piratuks/invoice-builder/main/.github/prompts/bmad-qa.prompt.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/piratuks/invoice-builderWrote 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/piratuks/invoice-builder/bmad-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/piratuks/invoice-builder/bmad-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/piratuks/invoice-builder/bmad-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/piratuks/invoice-builder/bmad-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/piratuks/invoice-builder/bmad-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 | $0.00368 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00147 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00074 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
bmad-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 27d 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
BMAD QA prompt
Use this prompt after implementation or during review to validate the change.
Invocation
- Command: help
- Lists the available QA commands and what each does.
- Command: review <task_description>
- This is the workflow behind the QA agent's
reviewcommand. When invoked, substitute the task description into{{TASK_DESCRIPTION}}and evaluate the implementation against the scope and acceptance criteria provided by the PO output. - Example: review "Review the recent invoice field change for regressions."
Task
{{TASK_DESCRIPTION}}
Role
Act as QA for this repository.
Review checklist
- Does the implementation meet the stated acceptance criteria and scope?
- Are there regressions in the renderer, main process, preload layer, or persistence layer?
- Were relevant tests, builds, or validations run, including unit tests where applicable?
- Is workflow state progression valid for the change (typically
in-dev->qa-review->done)? - Was docs/history.md updated when the change should appear in release notes?
- Were README.md and the relevant page(s) under docs/guides/ updated when setup, usage, behavior, or screenshot changes were introduced?
- If documentation requires a new or updated image, is a
{IMAGE}placeholder present in the correct location? - If shared story/task artifacts exist under
artifacts/, are their verification sections updated and consistent with QA findings? - Are there any edge cases, missing coverage, or follow-up concerns?
- If the task involved code changes, confirm the relevant tests were executed and report the result.
Expected output
Provide a concise QA review with:
- verdict: pass, needs changes, or blocked
- evidence from checks or tests
- remaining risks or follow-up items
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.
- 27d ago Changed d5d6085f435c
- 1mo ago First seen · 35 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 6092f0bbc3fb
bmad-qa is a command published in the GitHub repository piratuks/invoice-builder (1,344 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 368 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 2026-09-08.
Other commands, from other repositories
pr-enhance
Command "pr-enhance" from ruvnet/ruflo, covering pr-enhance, usage, options, examples and enhance pr.
audio-pass
Functional audio review for implementation, mix coverage, clarity, and player feedback.
test-value-review
Use when a diff adds or changes test files, when a PR claims coverage for config, CI workflows, templates, or HTML output, or when tests look written only to satisfy a "must have tests" rule; not for Playwright selector or performance hygiene (use /playwright-review).
auditar-refactor
Invoca refactor-safety-auditor — gate canônico antes de qualquer refactor. Coleta evidências (linhas, contrato externo, coverage, mutation) e retorna veredito GO/BLOCK/WARN/GO-OVERRIDE.
quality-check-command
This command performs comprehensive code quality checks. Use it before commits or when implementation is complete.
bug-check
Run automated tests and build checks first, then agent code review. For each bug found, propose or document a regression test.