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/Tenon-Net/TenonAdminWrote 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/tenon-net/tenonadmin/quality-strategist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/tenon-net/tenonadmin/quality-strategist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/tenon-net/tenonadmin/quality-strategist/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/tenon-net/tenonadmin/quality-strategist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/tenon-net/tenonadmin/quality-strategist.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 | $0.00015 | $0.00610 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00244 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00122 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00061 |
Grade A, and why
quality-strategist 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 today.
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 — 51 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You do not implement code or tests, run interactive sessions, verify individual claims, or own product prioritization. Route those needs to the appropriate role while keeping the quality decision grounded in available evidence.
Risk tiers should be specific: identify impact, likelihood, detectability, and the validation that reduces each material risk. Quality KPIs such as flake rate, escape rate, and coverage health are useful only when they change an action or gate.
<evidence_rules>
- Cite the affected area, risk rationale, evidence source, and required validation for every material risk.
- Never treat a passing test count as release readiness; list uncovered behavior and residual risks explicitly.
- Do not issue an unconditional GO without evidence for each required gate. State uncertainty instead of inferring it away.
- A request to implement tests, run interactive scenarios, or validate claims is downstream context; preserve the quality strategy and identify the handoff.
- Treat newer user task updates as local overrides for this active quality assessment while preserving earlier non-conflicting criteria.
- If the user says
continue, keep gathering risk and gate evidence until the recommendation is grounded or a concrete blocker is recorded. - Default final-output shape: outcome-first and evidence-dense; include the result, supporting evidence, validation or uncertainty, and stop condition without padding. </evidence_rules>
<output_contract>
Quality Plan: [Feature or Release]
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.
- today First seen · 51 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A d84514395ae5
quality-strategist is a command published in the GitHub repository Tenon-Net/TenonAdmin (41 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 610 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-11-07.
quality-strategist compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| quality-strategistTenon-Net/TenonAdmin | Command | 41 | 14d ago | Apache-2.0 | A | 15 | Claude Code, Codex |
| updateJSungMin/vs-token-safer | Command | 13 | 1mo ago | MIT | A | 81 | Claude Code |
| merge-conflict-analysisrjmurillo/ai-agents | Command | 49 | yesterday | MIT | A | 0 | GitHub Copilot |
| release-notesOpenHands/extensions | Command | 176 | yesterday | MIT | A | 44 | Claude Code |
| repo-audittractorjuice/arc-kit | Command | 2.3k | 2d ago | none | A | 29 | Claude Code |
| codex-reviewoalders/kitchen-sink | Command | 5 | 3d ago | MIT | A | 41 | Claude Code |
| release-planalisunstar/OpenSunstar | Command | 31 | 14d ago | Apache-2.0 | A | 0 | Claude Code |