Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add awrshift/agent-memory-kit/plugin install memory-kitWrote 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/skills/awrshift/agent-memory-kit/qa-sweep)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/awrshift/agent-memory-kit/qa-sweep"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/awrshift/agent-memory-kit/qa-sweep/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/skills/awrshift/agent-memory-kit/qa-sweep"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/awrshift/agent-memory-kit/qa-sweep.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 | $0.00199 | $0.01340 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00080 | $0.00536 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00040 | $0.00268 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00134 |
Grade A, and why
qa-sweep scanned grade A with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 22d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
ux-critique. Non-browser: contract (curl) · honesty (curl + read-only store queries). Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- qa-sweep — 100% identical, 41 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
QA Sweep — multi-lens agent QA of the live product
Read projects/<name>/qa/README.md FIRST (the protocol SSOT: environment rules · the five lens briefs ·
findings format · triage) — the lens briefs in agent prompts come verbatim from there, and the
account/mutation policy it sets is a hard rail, not advice. A project that predates this layout
may keep its protocol elsewhere — wherever its CLAUDE.md points, or at docs/qa/README.md,
context/qa/PROTOCOL.md, .claude/rules/qa-sweep.md, or in a project-local qa-sweep skill.
Look there before scaffolding: an existing protocol is the SSOT
wherever it lives, its run records go next to it, and a second protocol must never be created
beside it. Only when no protocol exists anywhere,
create one from the layer's protocol template (${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/qa-PROTOCOL-TEMPLATE.md in
the kit repo — copy it from there if this project only adopted the layer's .claude/ files)
and fill the placeholders before sweeping.
Steps
- Preflight (integrator, by hand): bring up the stack the protocol names (app · API · store) · pick the account per the protocol's policy (the demo/real account = OBSERVE-ONLY always; the seeded sacrificial account = mutation QA only when the run brief grants it) · make sure nothing else is writing to the shared store during the sweep (no integration test suites, no live jobs).
- Pick lenses for this run (default: user-flow + contract in parallel, then edge-state, then honesty + ux-critique). Browser lenses run CONCURRENTLY via the isolated Playwright MCP servers the protocol lists (one server per concurrent browser agent — mechanism + logged-in seed recipe in the protocol § Parallel lenses). Browser lenses: user-flow · edge-state · ux-critique. Non-browser: contract (curl) · honesty (curl + read-only store queries).
- Spawn
qaagents with the lens brief from the protocol § Lens briefs + the run scope. The run scope MUST name: the governing spec (projects/<name>/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md), theAC-nids under test from that spec's Acceptance table, the project's workflow tier (fromprojects/<name>/README.md, or the task'sTier:override inBACKLOG.md), and which screens/flows changed recently — QA the delta first, then one broad pass. At tierprototypeno sweep is expected: say so and stop. - Verify before ticketing (the fact-check rule): reproduce every P1/P2 finding yourself (the named repro steps) before it becomes a ticket. Unreproducible → back to the agent or drop with a note. «Impressions» never become tickets directly. A «pass» on an AC counts only when you reproduced the walked path yourself or ran the check named in that AC's «How it is checked» cell — an agent's report alone never passes an AC.
- Land the results: verified findings → backlog tickets (P1/P2) or a minors batch (P3) ·
one run record
projects/<name>/qa/qa-run-YYYYMMDD.md(lenses run · coverage · a per-AC tableAC | result (pass/fail/not exercised) | evidence· findings table with anACcolumn (—when the finding ties to no AC) and verified/dropped status · pointers to tickets) · a row in the protocol's § Runs index. After landing, fill the spec'sVerifiedcell for every AC that passed — the date +qa/qa-run-YYYYMMDD.md. - Cleanup: stop dev servers, remove stray screenshots from the repo root, re-seed the sacrificial account if a mutation run dirtied 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.
- 22d ago Changed · +18 lines 2ca347d9dc1a
- 27d ago Changed · +9 lines 0fb947ee72e8
- 1mo ago First seen · 46 lines · 199 tokens per session scan A 7fce5b08c9c0
qa-sweep is a skill published in the GitHub repository awrshift/agent-memory-kit (34 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 199 tokens to every session and 1,340 once invoked, about $0.0008 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
playwright-standard
Comprehensive, opinionated guidance for Playwright test development. Use ONLY when writing E2E, browser tests, UI tests, API, component, or visual tests, debugging failures, implementing Page Object Model, or configuring CI/CD. For unit tests, use vitest-standard. Use Playwright solely for E2E, API, and component…
sidekick-audit
Deterministic UI quality audit of a web page or a whole product — WCAG 2.2 A/AA accessibility (axe-core), Core Web Vitals (LCP/CLS), browser health (console errors, failed requests, mixed content) and tap-target size — reported dimensions-first, with confirmed-vs-uncertain findings clustered into root-cause families…
sidekick-test
Goal-based end-to-end UI testing that PROVES the outcome. Given a URL and a plain-language goal (e.g. 'sign up, create a project, and invite a teammate'), sidekick drives a real browser to do it and then verifies success with a DETERMINISTIC signal on the real page — the execution agent is never allowed to grade its…
agent-evaluation
A guide to measuring whether an AI agent works reliably on the tasks that matter. It covers repeatable test environments, program checks, human-like scoring rules, failure analysis, and experiments that separate model problems from system problems.
eval-dataset-design
A guide to creating reliable test sets for AI agents. Each evaluation task includes the request, the simulated user's behaviour, a reset starting state, and a success check that can be independently verified.
gsd-add-tests
Generate tests for a completed phase based on UAT criteria and implementation.