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 bmbouter/redhat-agents --skill acceptance-criteria-writergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bmbouter/redhat-agentsWrote 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/bmbouter/redhat-agents/acceptance-criteria-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bmbouter/redhat-agents/acceptance-criteria-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bmbouter/redhat-agents/acceptance-criteria-writer/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/bmbouter/redhat-agents/acceptance-criteria-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bmbouter/redhat-agents/acceptance-criteria-writer.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 | $0.00025 | $0.00336 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00168 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00067 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00034 |
Grade A, and why
acceptance-criteria-writer 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
When to Use
When a ticket needs acceptance criteria before it can be refined or worked on.
Instructions
Read local/jira-workflow.md to understand any AC format conventions.
1. Understand the requirement
Read the ticket's summary, description, and any comments. If the description is vague, ask the PO clarifying questions before drafting.
2. Draft acceptance criteria
Use the format from the workflow config. If no format is specified, default to a checklist format:
h3. Acceptance Criteria
* [ ] [Criterion 1 — specific, testable outcome]
* [ ] [Criterion 2]
* [ ] [Criterion 3]
For complex requirements, use Given/When/Then:
h3. Acceptance Criteria
* Given [precondition], when [action], then [expected result]
* Given [precondition], when [action], then [expected result]
Guidelines
- Each criterion must be testable — someone should be able to verify pass/fail.
- Cover the happy path and key edge cases.
- Include negative cases where relevant (what should NOT happen).
- Don't over-specify implementation details — describe outcomes, not code.
- Keep it concise — 3-7 criteria for a typical ticket.
3. Present for review
Show the drafted AC to the PO. Iterate based on feedback. Once approved, offer to update the ticket in Jira.
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 · 50 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 069600d8a6a1
acceptance-criteria-writer is a skill published in the GitHub repository bmbouter/redhat-agents (6 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 336 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
scaffold-dotnet-test-project
MUST USE when an existing .NET test project was excluded from a .slnf/CI solution filter, disappeared from .sln/.slnx discovery, or lost its production ProjectReference; also for requests to set up, create, reuse, add, register, include, or repair a test project. Handles "tests pass directly but CI discovers zero"…
cy-execute-task
Implement and verify an existing CompozyOS spec task, then update its tracking. Excludes review remediation.
team-qa
Orchestrate the QA team through a full testing cycle. Coordinates qa-lead (strategy + test plan) and qa-tester (test case writing + bug reporting) to produce a complete QA package for a sprint or feature. Covers: test plan generation, test case writing, smoke check gate, manual QA execution, and sign-off report.
gh-issue
Size-audit, write, and split BanyanDB issues that somebody else or an automated TDD workflow can implement. Use whenever the user asks to file or revise an issue, decide whether an issue is too large, make an issue TDD-ready, turn a design into tickets, or split an umbrella into executable leaves. Do not draft or file…
implement-feature
Implement an approved feature plan with fresh-context slices, TDD, evidence, and PR-ready output.
conductor-implement
Execute tasks from a track's implementation plan following TDD workflow.