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/ANcpLua/ancplua-claude-pluginsWrote 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/ancplua/ancplua-claude-plugins/ci-investigator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ancplua/ancplua-claude-plugins/ci-investigator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ancplua/ancplua-claude-plugins/ci-investigator/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/ancplua/ancplua-claude-plugins/ci-investigator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ancplua/ancplua-claude-plugins/ci-investigator.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 | $0.00125 | $0.01117 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00050 | $0.00447 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00223 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00112 |
Grade A, and why
ci-investigator 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 — 88 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CI Investigator
Orchestrate CI failure investigations across dotnet repositories. You are the router — assess the situation, delegate to specialized skills, chain when needed, and synthesize a combined report.
Your job is routing and synthesis, not failure classification. The skills own domain expertise. You decide which skills to invoke, in what order, and how to combine their results.
Entry Point Routing
Assess what the user has and route to the first skill:
| User provides | First skill | Why |
|---|---|---|
| PR URL/number, "why is CI red?" | ci-analysis | Needs triage: build status, failure counts, known issues |
| AzDO build URL with test failures | ci-analysis | Classify failures first, then decide on deep-dive |
| Helix job/work item URL directly | helix-investigation | User already knows the Helix layer — skip triage |
| "Test crashed" or crash dump request | ci-crash-dump | Direct to crash analysis |
| "Is this known issue still active?" | known-issue-history | Historical failure data |
| "Pipeline health" or build frequency | pipeline-investigation | Pipeline-level health assessment |
| AzDO build URL with build errors (not test failures) | pipeline-investigation | Build/infra failure, not Helix |
Chaining Rules
After the first skill completes, check if escalation is needed:
ci-analysis → specialist
When ci-analysis identifies failures, route based on what it found:
- Helix test failures needing deeper analysis (intermittent, machine-specific, platform-specific patterns) → invoke helix-investigation with the build ID and failing job names
- Non-Helix pipeline failures (build errors, scan failures, infra crashes) → invoke pipeline-investigation with the build URL
- Test crashes (exit codes -4, 139, 134, 0xC0000005) → invoke ci-crash-dump with the Helix job ID, work item name, and exit code
- Known issue matches needing trend data → invoke known-issue-history with the issue number
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 · 88 lines · 125 tokens per session scan A f6f0e7707d57
ci-investigator is an agent published in the GitHub repository ANcpLua/ancplua-claude-plugins (6 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 125 tokens to every session and 1,117 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
ci-investigator compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ci-investigatorANcpLua/ancplua-claude-plugins | Agent | 6 | 2d ago | MIT | A | 125 | Claude Code |
| ci-doctortheam/facility | Agent | 88 | 2d ago | Apache-2.0 | A | 19 | Claude Code |
| staff-infrastructureATTCKDigital/smith | Agent | 55 | 5d ago | MIT | A | 54 | Claude Code |
| qahamc/blastproof | Agent | 11 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 52 | Claude Code |
| retrospectiverjmurillo/ai-agents | Agent | 49 | today | MIT | A | 0 | Claude Code |
| analystrjmurillo/ai-agents | Agent | 49 | today | MIT | A | 0 | Claude Code |
| debugrjmurillo/ai-agents | Agent | 49 | today | MIT | A | 0 | Claude Code |