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 Liberty91LTD/cti-skills --skill quality-controlgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Liberty91LTD/cti-skillsWrote 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/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/quality-control)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/quality-control"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/quality-control/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/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/quality-control"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/quality-control.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00696 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00348 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00139 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
quality-control 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 — 84 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quality Control Standards
Review Process
- All products must be reviewed before moving to "published" status
- Reviews are performed by the quality-reviewer agent
- Products with CRITICAL issues are returned for revision
- Products with 3+ MAJOR issues are returned for revision
- MINOR issues are noted but don't block publication
Peer Review Checklist
A. Structural Integrity (Weight: 15%)
- Correct product template used
- Complete frontmatter (all required fields)
- TLP marking present and correctly applied
- Logical section ordering
- Appropriate length for product type
B. Analytical Rigor (Weight: 30%)
- Conclusions supported by evidence
- Key assumptions explicitly identified
- Alternative hypotheses considered (where applicable)
- Structured analytic techniques applied appropriately
- No logical leaps or unsupported assertions
- Temporal scope specified for all predictions
- Intelligence gaps acknowledged
C. Sourcing (Weight: 20%)
- All sources assessed with Admiralty Scale
- Source ratings justified and reasonable
- Source diversity (not single-source unless noted)
- Derivative vs independent sources distinguished
- No unattributed claims
D. Mandated Language (Weight: 20%)
- Confidence levels on all assessments (with rationale)
- Likelihood language on all predictions (with percentage ranges)
- No hedge-stacking
- No vague probabilistic language without probability band
- Confidence and likelihood not conflated
- Facts clearly distinguished from assessments
E. Technical Accuracy (Weight: 10%)
- MITRE ATT&CK mappings correct
- IOCs properly formatted and validated
- Technical claims verifiable
- No contradictions with known intelligence
F. Writing Quality (Weight: 5%)
- BLUF in first paragraph
- Active voice
- Specific language (dates, numbers, names)
- No unnecessary jargon
- Clear, concise sentences
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 · 84 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 999c615aa82b
quality-control is a skill published in the GitHub repository Liberty91LTD/cti-skills (18 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 696 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
ai-ad-copy-compliance-review
A risk-review assistant for advertising and sales copy. It examines provided material for possible concerns and suggests actions.
ai-agent-browser
A business-diagnosis assistant for marketing, operations, product, and sales questions. It breaks down a goal and produces a summary, findings, action suggestions, and reusable deliverables.
ai-article
A Chinese-language assistant for turning source material into article and content-operation deliverables. It is aimed at creators, marketers, technical teams, and media publishers.
ai-brand-voice-review
A business-diagnosis assistant for marketing, operations, services, and sales questions.
ai-browser-use
A business-diagnosis assistant for marketing, operations, product, and sales questions about how to approach a task.
ai-content-material-audit
A Chinese-language copy-review assistant for creators, marketers, operators, and media teams.