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 pdca-improvementgit 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/pdca-improvement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rbraga01/quality-engineering-skills/pdca-improvement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rbraga01/quality-engineering-skills/pdca-improvement/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/pdca-improvement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rbraga01/quality-engineering-skills/pdca-improvement.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 | $0.00073 | $0.01864 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00932 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00373 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00186 |
Grade A, and why
pdca-improvement 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 10d 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 — 194 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
PDCA Improvement Cycle
When to use
Use PDCA for:
- Continuous improvement initiatives (not problem reactions — use 8D for that)
- Implementing a process optimisation with uncertain outcome
- Piloting a change before full deployment
- Structured improvement from lessons learned or audit findings
- Meeting a quality objective that requires a new approach
Key distinction from 8D: PDCA is proactive or slow-burn improvement. 8D is reactive to a specific defect or failure. Both use root cause analysis, but PDCA has a broader scope and a pilot step before full deployment.
When PDCA is used for corrective action (e.g., responding to an audit finding or recurring NC): a Corrective Action Request (CAR) must also be opened to document root cause, actions, and VOE per ISO 9001 §10.2. PDCA is the improvement methodology; the CAR is the governance record.
Prerequisites
- Improvement goal defined (with target metric)
- Baseline data available (current performance)
- Owner and resources assigned
Workflow
PLAN — Analyse and define the approach
-
Define the current situation
- What is the problem or improvement opportunity?
- What is the current measured performance? (baseline)
- What is the target? (SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound)
-
Analyse root cause
-
Develop the improvement plan
- What specific actions will close the gap?
- Who is responsible for each action?
- What is the timeline?
- What resources are needed?
- What risks does the change introduce? Review the applicable PFMEA — does this change add or remove a failure mode? Does it affect any existing prevention or detection control?
-
Define the pilot scope
- Which process, line, or area will pilot the change?
- What volume or duration is needed to validate effectiveness? Define this before starting the pilot — do not decide after seeing results.
- What will you measure, and how?
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 194 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A bf004b57cf7c
pdca-improvement is a skill published in the GitHub repository RBraga01/Quality-Engineering-Skills (28 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 1,864 once invoked, about $0.0004 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-research
Conduct evidence-first technical research for Agentic QE, Ruflo, related ruvnet projects, or external tools. Use when Codex must investigate a repository, compare current upstream changes, trace dependencies and history, distinguish verified facts from inference, or synthesize findings into actionable engineering…
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-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…
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.