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 WellApp-ai/Well --skill qa-planninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/WellApp-ai/WellWrote 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/wellapp-ai/well/qa-planning)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wellapp-ai/well/qa-planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wellapp-ai/well/qa-planning/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/wellapp-ai/well/qa-planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wellapp-ai/well/qa-planning.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Tool Misuse · line 108 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
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 | $0.00026 | $0.04109 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.01644 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00822 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00411 |
Grade A, and why
qa-planning 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 2mo 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 — 533 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
QA Planning Skill
Generate the QA Contract - exhaustive Gherkin BDD scenarios (G#N) for all data sources and acceptance criteria (AC#N) for frontend. This contract is consumed by Plan Mode and verified by qa-commit skill.
When to Use
- During Ask mode Phase 2 (CONVERGE) for any feature work
- Before implementation to define testable acceptance criteria
- When documenting expected behavior for QA team
Output: QA Contract
The QA Contract is the primary artifact, consisting of:
- G#1, G#2, ... - Numbered Gherkin scenarios (backend/data)
- AC#1, AC#2, ... - Numbered acceptance criteria (frontend)
These IDs are referenced in Plan Mode's Commit Plan (Satisfies field) and verified by qa-commit skill.
Instructions
Phase 0: Identify ALL Data Sources (CRITICAL)
STOP. Before writing any Gherkin, exhaustively map ALL data sources for the feature.
Categorize each data source:
| Category | Description | Gherkin Type |
|---|---|---|
| Runtime API | Fetched at request time from server | API scenarios (G#N) |
| Build-time Static | Generated during build, served as static files | Build script scenarios (G#N) |
| Database | Direct DB queries (Hasura, Postgres) | Query scenarios (G#N) |
| External API | Third-party services | Integration scenarios (G#N) |
| Middleware | Request routing, auth, transforms | Routing scenarios (G#N) |
Data Source Inventory Template:
## Data Source Inventory
### Runtime APIs
| Endpoint | Method | Auth | Resource | Status |
|----------|--------|------|----------|--------|
| `/v1/resource` | GET | Yes | Resource | Existing |
| `/public/resource` | GET | No | Resource | New |
### Build-time Static
| Output Path | Source | Generator | Content |
|-------------|--------|-----------|---------|
| `/components.json` | Codebase | Build script | Component metadata |
| `/charts/[slug].json` | Codebase | Build script | Chart config + examples |
### Database Queries
| Query | Source | Auth | Purpose |
|-------|--------|------|---------|
| `connectors` | Hasura | Yes | List connectors |
### Middleware
| Route | Behavior | Auth |
|-------|----------|------|
| `developers.*` | Rewrite to public routes | Skip |
### External APIs
| Service | Endpoint | Purpose |
|---------|----------|---------|
| (none for this feature) | | |
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 533 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 9e00cf376809
qa-planning is a skill published in the GitHub repository WellApp-ai/Well (347 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 4,109 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
api-contract-testing
Design and review API contract tests across providers and consumers. Use for schema changes, compatibility regressions and client integration failures.
server-side-calls
Call tRPC procedures directly from server code using t.createCallerFactory() and router.createCaller(context) for integration testing, internal server logic, and custom API endpoints. Catch TRPCError and extract HTTP status with getHTTPStatusCodeFromError(). Error handling via onError option.
mirrord-prev-env
Help users create and manage mirrord preview environments — running a modified service as an isolated pod in a shared Kubernetes cluster, scoped by an environment key and HTTP/queue traffic filtering, so teams can validate and review changes against real traffic without affecting live services. Use when a developer…
mirrord-chaos
Help users chaos test their app with mirrord: inject artificial latency or connection errors into a mirrord session's outgoing traffic via per-session chaos rules managed with the mirrord chaos CLI. Use when a user wants to add latency or delay to outgoing connections or a dependency (e.g. a slow database), simulate…
dmr
Write django-modern-rest (dmr) code with the recommended patterns, covering controllers, routers, typed DTOs with msgspec or pydantic, auth, throttling, error handling, OpenAPI, and tests. Use whenever a project depends on django-modern-rest, imports dmr, or asks for a typed Django REST API, and when reviewing dmr…
horse-integration-tests
Guide for writing automated integration tests for Horse endpoints using DUnit/DUnitX and THTTPClient.