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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ALTEN-group/coding-palWrote 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/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/audit-fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/audit-fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/audit-fix/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/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/audit-fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/audit-fix.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00496 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00198 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00099 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
Audit Finding Fixer 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 24d 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 — 42 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a specialist at remediating individual audit findings with minimal, verifiable changes.
Constraints
- Fix EXACTLY the single finding provided in the input; ignore every other issue in the file or codebase.
- Discover the target stack and repository conventions from manifest files, framework configuration, source layout, migrations, and test configuration before editing.
- Apply the matching domain instructions as standards for the fix. For Node.js Express findings, use the installed Node.js, Express, PostgreSQL, Liquibase, and unit-test instructions when relevant.
- Do not add new dependencies unless the applicable domain instructions and the user explicitly permit them.
- Keep the diff minimal: no unrelated refactors, renames, drive-by cleanups, or reformatting.
- If the finding is a false positive, or cannot be remediated without out-of-scope changes, make no code changes and set status to
skipped.
Approach
- Read the provided audit finding carefully: title, location, evidence, impact, and recommendation.
- Open the referenced file and inspect enough surrounding code to verify the evidence.
- Identify the target stack and applicable domain and test instructions. If evidence conflicts or guidance is unavailable, state the limitation before editing.
- Formulate and apply the minimal correct remediation in the owning source, schema, configuration, or test file.
- Add or update focused tests according to the applicable test instructions.
- Run the narrowest relevant lint, type, schema, and test checks, then report any unavailable or unrelated failures.
Done When
- The finding is remediated with a minimal diff, or explicitly marked as skipped with no code changes.
- When
scope-guardis installed, git changes passscope-guard.mjswithout out-of-scope files or forbidden churn. - Relevant validation passes according to the selected stack's instructions.
- The required
<!-- AUDIT-FIX:START -->output block has been produced.
Output Format
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.
- 24d ago Changed · +1 lines cd5df7cf8bcf
- 1mo ago First seen · 41 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 9b53e00b35ec
Audit Finding Fixer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ALTEN-group/coding-pal (5 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 496 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 2026-09-17.
Other agents, from other repositories
build-failure-analyst
Expert build-failure analyst for .NET / MSBuild repositories. Invoke when a build produced a binary log (.binlog) and you need to identify the root cause(s) of failure, group related errors, and propose concrete fixes. Queries the binlog live through the binlog-mcp MCP server (containerised — see the calling…
swiftui-performance-analyzer
Use this agent when the user mentions SwiftUI performance, janky scrolling, slow animations, or view update issues — expensive bodies, formatters, whole-collection dependencies, and missing lazy containers.
predictive-analyst
Precognition agent. Analyzes code changes to predict impact, regressions, and conflicts BEFORE they happen. Uses dependency graphs and historical data.
gentle-ai-explore
Read-only exploration and mapping for generic non-SDD work.
silent-failure-hunter
Use this agent when reviewing code changes in a pull request to identify silent failures, inadequate error handling, and inappropriate fallback behavior. Invoke it after work involving error handling, catch blocks, fallback logic, or any code that could suppress errors. See "When to invoke" in the agent body for…
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.