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 agentmods add skills/gmickel/flow-next/flow-next-qanpx skills add gmickel/flow-next --skill flow-next-qagit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gmickel/flow-nextWrote 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/gmickel/flow-next/flow-next-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gmickel/flow-next/flow-next-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gmickel/flow-next/flow-next-qa.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.03116 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.01558 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00623 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00312 |
Grade A, and why
flow-next-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 6d 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 — 115 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/flow-next:qa — live-app real-user QA pass
flow-next's review surface today is all static: impl-review, spec-completion-review, quality-auditor, code-review. Nothing drives the running app like an unforgiving real user. /flow-next:qa fills that gap — it drives the deployed app (via fn-51 flow-next-drive), files structured P0/P1/P2 findings with evidence, and ends with a YES/NO ship verdict emitted as a proof-of-work receipt.
Augments, never replaces. QA is the cheap first live pass — the app already runs on the dev's machine during work, so run an initial agentic pass over the complete build before a human opens the PR. Like everything in flow-next it reduces human work agentically and surfaces problems to humans; it does not stand in for CI/staging QA or manual QA, which still happen downstream. Findings are advisory: they ride the draft PR + the bug-memory track, and the human reviewer + the land gate decide.
Two entry points, one skill. Run it user-invoked (you remember to), or wire it into the autonomous build loop as the optional pipeline.qa pilot stage (default off; flowctl config set pipeline.qa on). When on, /flow-next:pilot inserts a qa stage at the all-tasks-done juncture — one live pass over the complete build, just before make-pr (plan → plan-review → work → qa → make-pr). The stage is evidence-aware (it leans on what work already verified) and autonomy-safe (SHIP/NA/BLOCKED advance; NEEDS_WORK still advances to the draft PR and surfaces its findings — QA never hard-blocks the loop). See docs/ralph.md and flowctl.md (pipeline.qa config row).
Prerequisite - /flow-next:prime gates the recommendation. Prime's QA-readiness line is the upstream signal for turning pipeline.qa on: it recommends enabling this stage ONLY when the repo reaches operability tier 3 AND the DR-core prerequisites pass (seeded data, documented dev login, a drivable surface, readable runtime evidence). If prime reports "QA stage would fail here" or "not applicable to this shape", the app cannot be driven yet - fix the named prerequisites (or leave the stage off) rather than wiring in a stage that BLOCKs every run.
The differentiator vs spec-less QA tools is the spec is the source of intent: flow-next derives test scenarios directly from the spec — acceptance criteria → scenarios, R-IDs → coverage, boundaries → what NOT to test, decision context → expected behavior. The host already encodes intent instead of reconstructing it. The QA discipline (P0/P1/P2 taxonomy, evidence rules, session hygiene) is a lean borrow from Ray Fernando's running-bug-review-board skill (Apache-2.0 — credited in CHANGELOG); flow-next stays lean (no 18-reference port, ≤500-line skill cap).
Read workflow.md for the full phase-by-phase execution (discover → derive → prepare → execute → file → verdict).
What ships with it
6 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.
- 6d ago First seen · 115 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 2671c1ee0f27
flow-next-qa is a skill published in the GitHub repository gmickel/flow-next (691 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 3,116 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
playwright-cli
官方Microsoft Playwright CLI网页自动化工具，支持所有主流浏览器的无头/有头自动化操作，包括页面导航、元素交互、截图、录制、测试等功能。当用户提到网页自动化、浏览器操作、爬虫、截图、录制用户操作、E2E测试时触发。.
exec
Execute plan tasks sequentially using subagents. Use when user says 'exec', 'execute plan', 'run plan', or wants to implement a plan file task by task with isolated subagents.
pr
Comprehensive PR/issue review - analyzes architecture, tests, identifies unrelated changes mixed in, drafts review comment or issue comment. Use when user asks to review a PR, check a PR, look at PR changes, or comment on an issue.
project-execution
Executes implementation plans with progress tracking, checkpoint validation, and quality gates. Use after planning is complete and tasks are ready to implement.
backlog
Read, work, and maintain a Git repo's deferred-work items in docs/backlog/, one file per item. Use when the user says "backlog", "check backlog", "what's on my backlog", "work the backlog", "address the backlog", "add to backlog", "clean up backlog", or when a review or task produced items that are real but not being…
ask-codex
Consult OpenAI Codex for investigation, debugging, or code review. Use when user explicitly asks to "ask codex", "check with codex", "codex review", or as a last resort when stuck after 4+ failed attempts at debugging, investigation, or bug fix and completely out of ideas. Codex is slow (2-5 min), so only escalate…