Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to senda-labs/DQIII8. 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/senda-labs/DQIII8/main/.claude/commands/quality-gate.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/senda-labs/DQIII8Wrote 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/senda-labs/dqiii8/quality-gate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/senda-labs/dqiii8/quality-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/senda-labs/dqiii8/quality-gate/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/senda-labs/dqiii8/quality-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/senda-labs/dqiii8/quality-gate.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 | $0.00181 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00090 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00036 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00018 |
Grade A, and why
quality-gate 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 9d 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
/quality-gate — On-Demand Quality Pipeline
SSOT:
.claude/skills/quality-gate/SKILL.md. This command file is a pointer only — read the skill for the full 5-phase pipeline, its usage (/quality-gate [path|.] [--fix] [--strict]) and its output format. It previously carried a duplicate copy whose Phase 3 ran a strictly weaker lint gate (ruff check --select E,F,W, droppingPLE2510-PLE2515— the hidden/invalid-Unicode-control-character family, i.e. the trojan-source defense) and still reported PASS. Reconciled 2026-08-18 (F2): the skill's ruleset is canonical, and this file no longer restates it.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 11 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 18f09427de15
quality-gate is a command published in the GitHub repository senda-labs/DQIII8 (11 stars, last pushed 21d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 181 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
octo-deliver
Delivery phase - Review, validate, and test with multi-AI quality assurance.
octo-review
Enhanced multi-LLM review with inline PR comments — escalation path beyond Claude-native /review.
octo-develop
Development phase - Build solutions with multi-AI implementation and quality gates.
argos
A command for checking whether an implementation matches its design deliverables. Its Korean description compares the work to the design as part of a completion inspection.
review-pr
Revisa un PR de GitHub (por URL o número, en CUALQUIER repo) con múltiples agentes en paralelo — code review por área, seguridad, consistencia de contrato, rendimiento, tests y auditoría de comentarios de revisores — verifica cada hallazgo contra el código real y guarda un consolidado. Nunca comenta en el PR; eso es…
review
Enhanced multi-LLM review with inline PR comments — escalation path beyond Claude-native /review.