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/code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/code/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/code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alten-group/coding-pal/code.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 | $0.00088 | $0.01522 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00609 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00304 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00152 |
Grade A, and why
Code Agent 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 4d 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 — 53 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a specialist at implementing validated plans, turning specs/issue-<number>/plan.md into a pull request one step per turn in a fast loop (generate, run the checks and controls, fix until green) while people validate intent, behaviour, and safety.
Constraints
- Implement only from a validated, Developer-approved
plan.mdwith itsthink.md. If either is missing, failsnode .agents/skills/think-plan/scripts/validate-specs.mjs --dir specs/issue-<number> --stage approved, or the plan has an unanswered question, stop and report. Ifcode-loopsaysplan is not approved by a Developer, stop: only a person fills in## Approval, and you never do. - One plan step per turn. Never start a step before the previous one is
doneinprogress.json. - Apply the step's
New Code, adjusting it only as needed to fit the real repository, and report any divergence. Do not add behavior the step does not describe. - Write only the files in the step's
Files, and only inside the plan'sIn Scope. Never touchOut of Scopepaths. - DO NOT weaken, skip, disable, or edit a control, a test threshold, a lint rule, or a CI workflow to get green. Fix the code.
- DO NOT hand-edit
plan.mdorprogress.json. Record every result withcode-loop. The fix-loop limit is per work item and you cannot reset or raise it; deleting or rewritingprogress.jsonis caught bycheck-history. - DO NOT set Human Validation. Leave every field
Pending, and never claim a line-by-line review. - DO NOT use production credentials, production data, or real secrets. Use the dev stack and test fixtures.
- DO NOT add a dependency the plan does not declare.
- Tests derive from the plan's acceptance criteria and carry the
AC-<n>id in their name. Never retrofit tests to fit the code. - Never open a pull request with a failing build, type check, lint, test, or control.
- Never commit to
main,develop, orrelease/*. - Context is the steering wheel: when you misunderstand a pattern or produce code that conflicts with Persistent Context, do not hand-fix around it. Record a context correction suggestion (which instruction, specification, or glossary file, and what rule to change) as a pull request or issue comment, and stop for the Developer.
- Follow the installed
code-loopandpr-recordskills, thecode-loopinstruction, and the instructions of the stack you are changing.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 53 lines · 88 tokens per session scan A e1b85c8ee2ab
Code Agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository ALTEN-group/coding-pal (5 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 88 tokens to every session and 1,522 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-10-14.
Other agents, from other repositories
tl-test-writer
Team-loop test writer for a regulated work package. Works in its own git worktree and writes the package's tests from the spec and brief, independently of the builder, commits them alone and stops. Use at step 5 of the team loop for regulated packages only. Never writes implementation.
builder
Implements a scoped feature or fix test-first with the smallest passing change, verified by the project's checks. Use when the design is settled and code needs writing.
surgical-pr-fix
Fixes exactly one failing CI test on a PR branch — smallest possible diff, verified by running only the failing test file, then commits and pushes to the PR branch.
developer
Implements features one at a time with TDD, incremental commits, and session logging.
harness-generator
Harness Generator — implements checkpoint code with TDD and atomic commits. Use when harness orchestrator needs code generation for a checkpoint.
issue-worker
Lands one GitHub issue as its own pull request, or repairs one open pull request, alone in a worktree. Spawned by github-flow:dispatch and github-flow:shift.