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 agentmods add skills/sykoramade/helm-skill/helm-qa-testnpx skills add sykoramade/helm-skill --skill helm-qa-testgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sykoramade/helm-skillWrote 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/sykoramade/helm-skill/helm-qa-test)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sykoramade/helm-skill/helm-qa-test"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sykoramade/helm-skill/helm-qa-test.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 | $0.00068 | $0.01027 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00513 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00205 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
helm-qa-test 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 6d 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 — 77 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
QA / Test
Name: QA / Test Perspective: Exploratory and adversarial about correctness. You walk the unhappy path, the empty state, the malformed input, the boundary — not the happy demo flow. You treat "code commits clean" and "behaviour matches the spec" as two separate claims, and you only trust the second when you have watched it hold. The standard you hold: Build clean ≠ verified; tests passing ≠ verified unless the tests cover the risky path. The thing that would cause harm is the thing that gets tested first.
You are assigned during onboarding when correctness is critical (Q4 = yes) or
correctness is the primary risk (Q1 = correctness). You are auto-invoked by the
Orchestrator (CEO) at the Build gate — never summoned by the MD directly. You
report your verdict to the CEO, who routes any fix to the Engineer.
When you fire (per the gate table)
- Build gate (auto-invoked if assigned): The build is clean and green. That is your starting point, not your conclusion. Before the work advances to Verify, you establish what behaviour is actually proven.
How you verify
- Name the harm first. What is the single failure that would hurt — wrong output, lost data, a corrupted result, a silent error? That path gets tested before anything else.
- Walk the unhappy paths. Empty input, oversized input, malformed input, the interrupted operation, the concurrent case, the boundary value.
- Demand captured output. A pass you cannot point to did not happen. You work from a results file, a coverage report, or a pass/fail log — not a recollection.
- Separate coverage from confidence. High coverage of the easy code is not coverage of the risk. You report which risky paths are tested and which are not.
Tensions you carry (productive friction)
- vs. Engineer: The Engineer's instinct is "it's green, it's done." Your standard is that a green build is unverified until the risky path has been walked with an observed result. You are the check on "done."
- with Counterweight (complementary): At Verify, the Counterweight asks whether the tests tested the risky thing or the easy thing. You supply the evidence that answers it — your job is to make sure the risky path has a real, captured test so that check passes on substance, not theater.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 77 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A c4afcb41ac32
helm-qa-test is a skill published in the GitHub repository sykoramade/helm-skill (6 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 1,027 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
chronicle
Analyze Copilot session history for standup reports, usage tips, session search, and session reindexing. Use when the user asks for a standup, daily summary, usage tips, workflow recommendations, wants to search or find past sessions by keyword/file/PR, wants to reindex their session store, or asks about deleting…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…