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 Kit4Some/Oh-my-ClaudeClaw --skill qagit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Kit4Some/Oh-my-ClaudeClawWrote 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/kit4some/oh-my-claudeclaw/qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kit4some/oh-my-claudeclaw/qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kit4some/oh-my-claudeclaw/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 | $0.00000 | $0.03397 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01699 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00679 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00340 |
Grade A, and why
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 8d 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 — 466 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
name: qa description: > Systematically QA test code and fix bugs found. Run tests, find failures, fix them with atomic commits, re-verify. Triggers on "qa", "QA", "테스트", "find bugs", "test and fix", "버그 찾아서 고쳐", "품질 검사". Three tiers: Quick (critical/high), Standard (+ medium), Exhaustive (+ cosmetic). Produces before/after health scores, fix evidence, and ship-readiness summary. allowed-tools:
- Bash
- Read
- Write
- Edit
- Glob
- Grep
- Agent
- AskUserQuestion
/qa — Test → Fix → Verify
You are a QA engineer AND a bug-fix engineer. Run tests, find failures, fix them in source code with atomic commits, then re-verify. Produce a structured report with before/after evidence.
Preamble
Before executing this skill:
-
Load context from memory:
memory_search(query: "{skill-relevant-query}", associative: true, limit: 5) memory_search(tag: "{skill-name}", limit: 3)Review returned memories for relevant past context, decisions, and patterns.
-
Check OMC state for active work:
state_get_status()If conflicting active tasks exist, warn the user before proceeding.
-
Detect current branch (for git-related skills):
git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo "not-a-git-repo" -
Check proactive mode:
state_read("occ-proactive")If
"false": do NOT proactively suggest other OpenClaw-CC skills during this session. Only run skills the user explicitly invokes. -
Log skill activation:
memory_daily_log(type: "note", entry: "Skill activated: /{skill-name}")
Memory Context Loading
Before starting work, load relevant context from the 3-layer memory system:
# Search for related past work
memory_search(query: "{task description}", associative: true, limit: 5)
# Search by relevant tags
memory_search(tag: "{relevant-tag}", limit: 3)
# Check for recent related daily logs
memory_search_date(start: "{7 days ago}", end: "{today}", category: "daily-logs", limit: 5)
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 8d ago First seen · 466 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A b43f57b3d3db
qa is a skill published in the GitHub repository Kit4Some/Oh-my-ClaudeClaw (4 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 3,397 tokens. 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
Verify Elixir/Phoenix changes — compile, format, and test in one loop. Use after implementation, before PRs, or after fixing bugs.
diagnostic-first-refactoring
Analyze codebase structure before making changes — the "Surgeon's Scan" pattern.
qa
Systematic QA testing of a web application: diff-aware, tiered, with fix-and-verify loop.
refactor-safely
Restructure existing code safely without changing externally observable behavior. Composes context, design, architecture, code quality, and testing guardrails into a characterization-first refactoring workflow. Use when the user says 'refactor this', 'clean this up', 'untangle this module', 'move this to the right…
ai-agents-empirical-probe-toolkit
Prove-it methods for this repo. Six recipes for runtime-contract probes, guard and threshold calibration, eval A/B, docs-vs-reality audits, reproduce-on-main CI triage, and negative-control test design, each with a worked example from repo history. Use when you say probe the runtime contract, calibrate this guard…
testing
Writing effective tests and running them successfully. Covers layer-specific mocking rules, test design principles, debugging failures, and flaky test management. Use when writing tests, reviewing test quality, or debugging test failures.