Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplatenpx agentmods add skills/upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate/exploratory-testingWrote 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/upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate/exploratory-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate/exploratory-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate/exploratory-testing/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/upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate/exploratory-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate/exploratory-testing.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 | $0.00327 | $0.07059 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00131 | $0.02824 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00065 | $0.01412 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00033 | $0.00706 |
Grade A, and why
exploratory-testing scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 3d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
| `[API_TOOL]` | the OpenAPI MCP (schema only) + curl | `AGENTS.md` Tool Resolution | How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 295 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Forbidden invocations
NEVER invoke /sdd-* skills from this workflow. SDD is an optional
user-installed ceremony; this skill ships self-contained and does not chain
SDD under any condition. If you need to refactor KATA, fixtures, cli/,
scripts/, or api/schemas/ pipeline, exit this skill first and invoke
/framework-development.
This boundary is mechanical, not advisory: scripts/lint-skills.ts rejects
any /sdd- mention outside this section. See:
.agents/skills/agentic-qa-core/references/skill-composition-strategy.md §4
(governs users who manually install SDD).
Exploratory Testing — Find Bugs, Discover Test Candidates, Without a Ticket
Freestyle but precise testing across a critical flow, a module, or the whole product: UI, API and DB
together, never one alone. No ticket required. This skill hunts for real bugs in the highest-risk surfaces
(data integrity and security first) and produces candidate scenarios that were executed live and
checked against existing coverage, so test-documentation receives new work, not a second copy of
what the repository already holds.
The method rests on four disciplines, and skipping any of them is how a plausible-looking anomaly becomes a wrong bug report: a parallel reconnaissance fan-out, a refutation pass whose job is to kill findings, a main-thread tie-break when verifiers disagree, and evidence-backed reporting. This repository adds the fifth: the coverage view, built before anyone explores, so every candidate says whether it is NEW, WEAK or already COVERED.
Position in the pipeline
This is the second entry into the Execution stage (agentic-qa-core/references/stage-gates.md
§"The stages, by name"): same stage, entry by SCOPE instead of by ticket. It is the explore and confirm
steps of the discovery-driven flow (agentic-qa-core/references/discovery-driven-doctrine.md §1).
project-context coverage (gap list) --+
v
[exploratory-testing]
| | |
v v v
confirmed bugs candidate scenarios behaviour with no Story
(person signs, NEW / WEAK, oracle -> coverage Tech Story
sprint-testing confirmed -> ROI in (person signs; doctrine §3)
retests later) test-documentation
What ships with it
4 files 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.
- 3d ago First seen · 295 lines · 327 tokens per session scan A adb7faa26991
exploratory-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository upex-galaxy/agentic-qa-boilerplate (26 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 327 tokens to every session and 7,059 once invoked, about $0.0013 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-10-25.
Other skills, from other repositories
gate
(forwward) Runs lint, typecheck, build, and test in a self-healing loop that reads errors, fixes them, and retries up to 4 times. Triggers on verify, check, make sure it works, pre-commit validation, pre-deploy checks, or any quality gate.
moai-workflow-loop
Ralph Engine - Automated feedback loop with LSP diagnostics and AST-grep integration for continuous code quality improvement. Use when implementing error-driven development, automated fixing, or continuous quality validation workflows.
moai-workflow-testing
Use when writing tests, measuring coverage, or running characterization, performance, or PR-review QA. Comprehensive specialist combining DDD testing, characterization tests, performance profiling, and TRUST 5 quality-assurance validation.
behavior-contract
Bug condition/postcondition formalization as testable Behavior Contracts. Defines invariants that must be preserved across fixes.
quality-hooks
Language-specific auto-lint/format/typecheck pipeline. Supports Python (ruff+pyright), TypeScript (prettier+eslint+tsc), Go (gofmt+golangci-lint). Auto-fix and convergence loops.
bug-reproduction
Turn a vague bug report into a VERIFIED minimal reproduction and then a failing regression test, agent-driven end to end. Covers extracting the implicit repro from a thin report (env, build, steps, data), the reproduce-minimize-isolate-capture loop, git bisect to find the introducing commit, building a deterministic…