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/gracefullight/docusaurus-plugins/oma-qanpx skills add gracefullight/docusaurus-plugins --skill oma-qagit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gracefullight/docusaurus-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/gracefullight/docusaurus-plugins/oma-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gracefullight/docusaurus-plugins/oma-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gracefullight/docusaurus-plugins/oma-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 | $0.00058 | $0.01460 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00730 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00292 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00146 |
Grade A, and why
oma-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 yesterday.
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.
This is a copy
95% identical to oma-qa — 8 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 146 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
QA Agent - Quality Assurance Specialist
Scheduling
Goal
Review and verify software quality with priority on security, performance, accessibility, correctness, test coverage, and standards-aligned quality evidence.
Intent signature
- User asks for review, QA, security audit, OWASP, performance, accessibility, coverage, lint, testing, or ISO/IEC quality recommendations.
- User needs findings with evidence, severity, file references, and concrete remediation.
When to use
- Final review before deployment
- Security audits (OWASP Top 10)
- Performance analysis
- Accessibility compliance (WCAG 2.2 AA)
- Test coverage analysis
When NOT to use
- Initial implementation -> let specialists build first
- Writing new features -> use domain agents
Expected inputs
- Diff, codebase area, PR, feature branch, build output, test results, or quality concern
- Applicable standards such as OWASP, WCAG, ISO/IEC 25010, or ISO/IEC 29119
- Verification commands and target environment when available
Expected outputs
- Ordered findings with severity, evidence, file/line references, and fixes
- Test, security, performance, accessibility, and quality recommendations
- Verification summary and residual risks
Dependencies
resources/execution-protocol.md, examples, ISO guide, checklist, and self-check- Automated tools such as
npm audit,bandit,lighthouse, linters, tests, and coverage tools when applicable
Control-flow features
- Branches by review type, available diff, quality dimension, and tool availability
- Reads code and reports; may run tools; generally should not implement broad feature work
- Findings must be reproducible and prioritized
Structural Flow
Entry
- Identify review scope and quality dimensions.
- Collect diff, files, commands, and standards context.
- Choose automated checks before manual review where practical.
Scenes
- PREPARE: Define scope, severity rubric, and evidence requirements.
- ACQUIRE: Read diff/code and run relevant automated tools.
- REASON: Analyze security, performance, accessibility, correctness, and test coverage.
- VERIFY: Reproduce findings and reject false positives.
- FINALIZE: Report findings, remediation, test gaps, and residual risk.
What ships with it
7 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.
- yesterday First seen · 146 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 739deef2e5fe
oma-qa is a skill published in the GitHub repository gracefullight/docusaurus-plugins (22 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 1,460 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 95% identical to oma-qa, differing in 8 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
test-driven-development
Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code.
ways-of-working
Codifies devantler-tech engineering practices: agent-first development workflow, TDD, CI/CD pipelines, GitHub Flow, code quality gates, and Kubernetes workflows with ksail. Use when filing issues, planning work, setting up projects, configuring CI/CD, writing tests, debugging, or making architectural decisions.
test-driven-development
Drives development with tests. Use when implementing any logic, fixing any bug, or changing any behavior. Use when you need to prove that code works, when a bug report arrives, or when you're about to modify existing functionality.
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
wukongim-cloud-analysis
Diagnose one exact live WuKongIM cloud Simulation Run or chat-lifecycle Cloud Lease through the repository Analysis MCP. Use when the user or a local Analysis Session asks Codex to inspect a run's cluster state, Prometheus signals, application logs, diagnostics, Controller task audits, profiles, or redacted config…
tdd
Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration tests.