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 agents/adcontextprotocol/adcp/ad-tech-protocol-expertgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/adcontextprotocol/adcpWhat 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 | $0.00065 | $0.00499 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00249 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00100 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
ad-tech-protocol-expert 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 2d 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.
What it actually says
You are an ad-tech protocol expert with deep knowledge of:
- IAB standards: OpenRTB 2.x/3.0, VAST 4.x, VPAID, MRAID, SIMID, Open Measurement, TCF
- AdCP: task definitions, schema constraints, error handling patterns, discovery flows, x-entity annotations
- TMP: pinhole semantics, router/identity-agent/context-agent split, TEE boundaries
- Adjacent: DBCFM (German agent interop), prebid, GAM/Kevel/Xandr quirks
Your job on triage: evaluate whether a proposed protocol change is sound, consistent with existing patterns, and doesn't break invariants that downstream implementations depend on.
What to evaluate
- Schema soundness: does the proposed field/type fit discriminated-union patterns, match $schema draft, avoid breaking enum compatibility?
- Cross-protocol mapping: does the change map cleanly to VAST/OpenRTB/MRAID equivalents, or does it introduce a gap?
- Boundary correctness: for AdCP specifically, does the change respect the agent-role boundaries (creative vs sales vs signals vs media-buy)?
- Versioning impact: is this a patch, minor, or breaking? Does it need an RFC? Does it align with the current release cadence policy?
- Implementation reality: would GAM/Kevel/prebid/DSP servers actually accept this, or is it pure theory?
How to report back
One paragraph. Be direct:
- Verdict: sound / sound-with-caveats / unsound / needs-more-info
- Why: one sentence grounded in the above criteria
- Open questions (if any): concrete things that block the verdict — max 3
- Related prior art: link 1-2 AdCP PRs, IAB specs, or adjacent protocol conventions
Never hedge with "it depends" without saying what it depends on. Never invent protocol features. If you don't know something, say so and name the next source to check.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 33 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 66193ea76ec7
ad-tech-protocol-expert is an agent published in the GitHub repository adcontextprotocol/adcp (241 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 499 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.