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 RBraga01/Quality-Engineering-Skills --skill dvp-test-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RBraga01/Quality-Engineering-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/rbraga01/quality-engineering-skills/dvp-test-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rbraga01/quality-engineering-skills/dvp-test-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rbraga01/quality-engineering-skills/dvp-test-plan/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/rbraga01/quality-engineering-skills/dvp-test-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rbraga01/quality-engineering-skills/dvp-test-plan.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00101 | $0.01972 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.00986 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00394 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00197 |
Grade A, and why
dvp-test-plan 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 12d 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 — 171 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Design Verification Plan and Report (DVP&R)
When to use
Use this skill when:
- Creating a DVP for a new part design during APQP Phase 2
- Reviewing a supplier's DVP for completeness and DFMEA alignment
- Determining which tests are required for a specific failure mode or design characteristic
- Tracking test completion and recording results (the "R" in DVP&R)
- Assessing whether a design change requires additional validation testing
Prerequisites
- DFMEA with all failure modes identified and AP ratings assigned
- Engineering drawing with all characteristics defined
- Customer design specifications and performance requirements
- List of applicable standards and test methods (customer spec, ISO, SAE, etc.)
Workflow
Step 1 — Understand the DVP structure
The DVP&R is a table with one row per test. Each test must address at least one failure mode or design characteristic from the DFMEA.
The linkage rule: Every H-AP (High Action Priority) failure mode in the DFMEA must have at least one corresponding test in the DVP. If a failure mode has no test, document why (e.g., analysis-only justification with sign-off).
Step 2 — Build each DVP row
| Column | What to enter |
|---|---|
| Test number | Sequential reference (e.g., DVP-001) |
| DFMEA reference | Failure mode number(s) this test addresses |
| Test name / description | Specific name of the test (not "durability test" — use "salt spray 240h per ASTM B117") |
| Test specification | Standard or specification number with version (e.g., ASTM B117-19, SAE J2530, customer spec DS-XYZ) |
| Pass/fail criteria | Exact acceptance criteria (e.g., "no rust after 240h", "burst pressure > 150 bar", "dimension within ±0.05 mm") |
| Sample size | Number of parts to test |
| Who performs | Internal lab, external accredited lab, customer lab |
| Phase | P = Prototype, PL = Pre-launch, PR = Production |
| Planned date | Date test is scheduled to complete |
| Actual date | Date test was completed |
| Result | Pass / Fail / In progress |
| Report reference | Lab report number or document reference |
| Comments | Failures, deviations, re-test requirements |
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 171 lines · 101 tokens per session scan A 42d39e9a8859
dvp-test-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository RBraga01/Quality-Engineering-Skills (28 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 101 tokens to every session and 1,972 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
aqe-ruflo
Add optional Ruflo development-time orchestration to an Agentic QE workflow. Use when a task benefits from coordinated swarms, persistent cross-session memory, routing, or Ruflo hooks. Do not use for a one-shot edit, and never add Ruflo to shipped AQE runtime dependencies.
aqe-plan-work
Build dependency-aware execution plans for complex Agentic QE, Ruflo, integration, migration, or multi-stream engineering programs. Use when Codex must turn research or requirements into phased work, select a small AQE fleet, map critical paths and parallel streams, define acceptance gates, or sequence risky changes.…
aqe-plan-quality
Create risk-based quality and test plans for Agentic QE changes. Use when scoping a feature, translating requirements into verification work, selecting QE specialties, assessing testability, or deciding which .claude/agents/v3/qe-.md capabilities should inform a task. Do not use merely to execute an already-defined…
aqe-test-change
Design, implement, and run durable tests for Agentic QE code changes. Use when adding tests, reproducing a defect, filling a coverage gap, selecting affected Vitest suites, checking CLI/MCP parity, or verifying a fix in this repository. Do not use for a read-only quality review with no requested edits.
aqe-review-quality
Review Agentic QE changes and issue an evidence-backed quality verdict. Use for code review, regression-risk assessment, release readiness, quality-gate evaluation, security/performance/testability review, or checking whether a change has sufficient verification. Do not use when the user primarily asks to implement a…
execute
Run the generated Playwright tests and summarize pass/fail results. Use when the user wants to run the tests produced by /verefi:implement, check whether a test plan's acceptance criteria are met, or debug failing Verefi-generated tests.