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.
npx skills add bjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-plugins --skill quality-gategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-pluginsWrote 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/bjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-plugins/quality-gate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-plugins/quality-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-plugins/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/skills/bjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-plugins/quality-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-plugins/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 | $0.00040 | $0.00720 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00288 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00144 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00072 |
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 2mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 88 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quality Gate
Evaluate content against 6 dimensions. Deliver a clear verdict: SHIP, FIX, or BLOCK.
Input
Accept the content to review. This can be:
- Pasted text
- A file path to read
- A URL to fetch
Also ask: Who is the intended audience? What is the goal of this content?
Evaluation Dimensions
Score each dimension: PASS, NEEDS WORK, or FAIL.
1. Completeness
- Does the content cover everything it promises?
- Are there sections that trail off or feel unfinished?
- Are there missing examples, data, or proof points that the audience would expect?
2. Accuracy
- Are all facts, numbers, and claims verifiable?
- Are there statements that could be challenged without supporting evidence?
- Are technical details correct?
3. Voice Consistency
- Does the tone match the intended audience and channel?
- Are there shifts in formality, energy, or style within the piece?
- If a brand voice guide exists (
reference/brand-voice.md), does the content follow it?
4. Formatting
- Is the structure scannable (headings, short paragraphs, lists where appropriate)?
- Are there formatting inconsistencies (mixed list styles, inconsistent heading levels)?
- Is the length appropriate for the format and channel?
5. Links and References
- Do all links work and point to the intended destination?
- Are sources cited where claims are made?
- Are internal references (file paths, section names) correct?
6. Audience Fit
- Would the intended reader find this relevant and valuable?
- Is the complexity level appropriate (not too basic, not too advanced)?
- Does it address what the audience cares about, not just what the author wants to say?
Verdict Logic
- SHIP — All 6 dimensions score PASS. Content is ready to publish.
- FIX — One or more dimensions score NEEDS WORK, but none score FAIL. Content needs specific improvements before publishing.
- BLOCK — One or more dimensions score FAIL. Content has fundamental issues that require significant rework.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 88 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 449208a8ea9b
quality-gate is a skill published in the GitHub repository bjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-plugins (1 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 720 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
quality-gate compared with skills from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| quality-gatebjorn-ingmanson/thefroject-plugins | Skill | 1 | 4mo ago | MIT | A | 40 | Claude Code |
| imagegenopenai/codex | Skill | 134k | today | Apache-2.0 | A | 113 | Codex |
| local-ai-agentsmicrosoft/ai-agents-for-beginners | Skill | 79k | yesterday | MIT | A | 200 | Claude Code, Codex |
| playwright-climicrosoft/playwright | Skill | 100k | yesterday | Apache-2.0 | A | 19 | Claude Code |
| browser-automationopenclaw/openclaw | Skill | 394k | today | MIT | A | 36 | Claude Code |
| systematic-debuggingobra/superpowers | Skill | 314k | 4d ago | MIT | A | 21 | Claude Code |
| next-cache-components-adoptionvercel/next.js | Skill | 143k | today | MIT | A | 95 | Claude Code |