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 janrummel/claude-orchestrator-starter --skill quality-gategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/janrummel/claude-orchestrator-starterWrote 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/janrummel/claude-orchestrator-starter/quality-gate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/janrummel/claude-orchestrator-starter/quality-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/janrummel/claude-orchestrator-starter/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/janrummel/claude-orchestrator-starter/quality-gate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/janrummel/claude-orchestrator-starter/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 | $0.00056 | $0.01469 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00734 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00294 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00147 |
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quality-Gate — Output Quality Orchestration
You orchestrate output quality checks. You do NOT replace signal-check or challenge — you coordinate them and add external verification + a quality score.
Architecture
Output created
│
▼
[Trigger Check] ──→ Level 0: No check needed → Deliver output
│
▼
[Classifier] ──→ Determines review perspectives + level (1/2/3)
│
├─ Level 1: Quick Check ──→ /signal-check
│
├─ Level 2: Deep Check ──→ /signal-check + External Verification + QS calculation
│
└─ Level 3: Full Review ──→ Multi-perspective review + External Verification + /challenge
│
▼
[Synthesis] ──→ Consolidate findings → Calculate QS → Report
Quick Reference
| Command | Level | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| (automatic) | 0-2 | Trigger check → appropriate level |
/qg or /quality-gate |
2 | Deep Check (default for manual invocation) |
/qg-full |
3 | Full Review with everything |
/qg-score |
— | Calculate QS only, no review |
Trigger Check
Scan the output for risk indicators:
| Indicator | Example | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Quantitative claims | "Market will grow 40%" | High |
| Forecasts / predictions | "By 2030, there will be..." | High |
| Causal claims | "X causes Y", "leads to" | Medium |
| Recommendations with consequences | "You should switch to..." | Medium |
| Regulatory / legal statements | "This complies with..." | High |
| Domain-specific technical claims | Standards, specifications | Medium |
Triage logic:
- 0 indicators → Level 0 (no check)
- 1 low indicator → Level 1
- 2+ indicators or manual
/qg→ Level 2 /qg-fullor gate recommendation → Level 3
Workflow
Level 1 (Quick Check)
- Run
/signal-checkon the output - Calculate Quality Score (QS)
- Report findings
Level 2 (Deep Check)
- Run
/signal-checkon the output - External verification for quantitative claims (web search, known sources)
- Consistency check against memory/project state
- Calculate QS
- Report with verification table
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 · 175 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 1a872392c768
quality-gate is a skill published in the GitHub repository janrummel/claude-orchestrator-starter (5 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 1,469 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
verify-implementation
A workflow that runs a project’s verification skills to produce a report on coding patterns, architecture rules, and project conventions. It is intended for work after implementation, before a pull request, or during code review.
verification-engine
Use when verifying build/test/lint before commit, PR, or completion claims. Runs verification pipeline in fresh subagent context with auto-repair. Triggers on /handoff-verify, pre-commit check, build verification, test validation.
ha-test-strategy
Hope-native test strategy for features, fixes, and refactors: select test-first, regression-first, characterization, integration, E2E, or manual evidence according to risk and repository rules.
ha-verify
Hope-native completion and verification discipline: map each requirement to current direct evidence, choose the smallest sufficient checks, and distinguish proven, failed, blocked, stale, or unverified claims.
plan-pipeline-execute
Execute a validated plan: worktree isolation, TDD scaffolding, level-based parallel agents, quality gate with smoke test, PR creation and merge. Handles everything through to merged PR.
qa
Systematic QA testing of a web application: diff-aware, tiered, with fix-and-verify loop.