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 easyinplay/harnessed --skill qagit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/easyinplay/harnessedWrote 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/easyinplay/harnessed/qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/easyinplay/harnessed/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/easyinplay/harnessed/qa/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/easyinplay/harnessed/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/easyinplay/harnessed/qa.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 | $0.00131 | $0.02262 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00052 | $0.00905 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00452 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00226 |
Grade A, and why
verify-qa 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 25d 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 — 113 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
verify-qa workflow (v3)
Overview
5-phase sub-workflow mapping CLAUDE.md "Verify 阶段 — 可选 /qa" onto harnessed runtime (Phase v3.0-3.4 W0.13a — D-04 Stage ④ Verify 7 sub + D-12 gstack 治理关卡 + Pattern A sub-workflow ship; T2.3 三层职责矩阵 + 非功能性诊断 4 条 lane 接线)。
| phase | id | upstream | model | capability | gate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 01-qa |
gstack | sonnet | {{ capabilities.gstack-qa.cmd }} |
judgments.stage-routing.verify-qa-ui.fires |
| 2 | 02-e2e-ci |
playwright-test | sonnet | (upstream-driven) | judgments.web-testing-routing.playwright-test-default.fires |
| 3 | 03-browser-probe |
gstack | sonnet | {{ capabilities.browse.cmd }} |
judgments.web-testing-routing.browse-probe.fires |
| 4 | 04-python-backend-e2e |
gstack | sonnet | {{ capabilities.webapp-testing.cmd }} |
judgments.web-testing-routing.webapp-testing-python-backend.fires |
| 5 | 05-perf-a11y-diagnostic |
chrome-devtools-mcp | sonnet | (upstream-driven) | judgments.web-testing-routing.chrome-devtools-mcp-diagnostic.fires |
Per-phase config loads from workflows/verify/qa/workflow.yaml; engine 4-level gate resolver
evaluates phase.has_ui_changes == true via expr-eval — true 则 invoke gstack /qa (端到端
QA 验收 + UI dogfood), false 则 skip。Phase 02-05 是三层职责矩阵 + 非功能性诊断的 4 条 lane,
由 subtask.test_type 单值互斥选择 — 无 test_type 信号时全 skip (只跑 01-qa)。
Capability refs
Sister workflows/capabilities.yaml entries:
gstack-qa— Bucket 3 治理关卡 (impl: gstack, cmd: /qa, fires_when: has_ui_changes)browse— Bucket 2 special-purpose (impl: gstack user-skill, cmd: /browse — 手层主导)playwright-cli— Bucket 2 special-purpose (impl: npm-cli, browser_probe — 未装 gstack 时的降级)playwright-test— Bucket 2 special-purpose (impl: npm-cli, e2e_test typescript)webapp-testing— Bucket 2 special-purpose (impl: gstack, e2e_test python)chrome-devtools-mcp— Bucket 4 tool-mcp (impl: mcp, cmd: chrome-devtools — 有 provider 时 非功能性诊断必用; provider 二选一: ecc bonus tier 或 optional 自装 manifest,两者都缺则 该 lane 不 fire,由 gate factchrome_devtools_available强制)
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 25d ago Changed · -1 lines 57466676b4d2
- 1mo ago First seen · 114 lines · 131 tokens per session scan A 870993710ed4
verify-qa is a skill published in the GitHub repository easyinplay/harnessed (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 131 tokens to every session and 2,262 once invoked, about $0.0005 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
feature-verify
Feature verification (READ-ONLY, P0-P5). Use when: verifying feature behavior after deployment, validating API responses, diagnosing production issues, post-deploy smoke test. Not for: modifying data (use feature-dev), code review (use codex-review-fast), writing tests (use codex-test-gen), security audit (use…
post-dev-test
Post-development test completion. Use when: checking test coverage after feature-dev, writing missing integration/e2e tests. Not for: unit test generation (use codex-test-gen), test review (use test-review). Output: test files + coverage report.
verify
Verification loop — lint -> typecheck -> unit -> integration -> e2e.
check-coverage
Comprehensive assessment of Unit / Integration / E2E three-layer test coverage, identify gaps and provide actionable recommendations.
run-smoke-tests
Inspect an unfamiliar repository, interpret a broad Markdown user journey at runtime, operate the real product through its supported web, API, CLI, desktop, or mobile surface, and produce an auditable pass, fail, or blocked judgment with screenshots, logs, recordings, and a step timeline when available. Use when asked…
test-strategy-document
Create a production-ready Testing Strategy and QA Execution Plan. Covers testing levels (unit, integration, E2E, performance), mocking boundaries, test environment matrix, code coverage thresholds, and automated CI pipeline runsheets. Use when establishing a QA framework for a new system or feature set.