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/arbiterForge/codeArbiterWrote 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/arbiterforge/codearbiter/coverage-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/arbiterforge/codearbiter/coverage-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/arbiterforge/codearbiter/coverage-auditor/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/arbiterforge/codearbiter/coverage-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/arbiterforge/codearbiter/coverage-auditor.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 | $0.00044 | $0.00937 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00375 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00187 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00094 |
Grade A, and why
coverage-auditor 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 19d 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.
The source is not reproduced here
Licensed AGPL-3.0
The repository is licensed AGPL-3.0, which this catalogue does not treat as permission to reproduce the file. Read it at the source.
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.
- 19d ago Changed · +14 lines 8eb16b9e6b7b
- 1mo ago First seen · 72 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 528d6656fb53
coverage-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository arbiterForge/codeArbiter (149 stars, last pushed today), licensed AGPL-3.0. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 937 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 agents, from other repositories
test-engineer
Test engineer agent for bug reproduction and verification. Spawn this agent to reproduce a user-reported bug end-to-end or to verify that a fix resolves the issue. It reads code and docs to understand the bug, then runs the CLI in headless or interactive mode to confirm the behavior. It can write test scripts as a…
Metis Verifier
L3 independent G6 verifier - proves behavior with real before/after runs, regression checks, adversarial inputs, and >=95% changed-line coverage.
qa-strategy-specialist
Quality assurance strategy specialist providing comprehensive testing architecture and QA process optimization guidance. Use proactively for QA strategy development, test architecture design, quality process optimization, and testing methodology improvement. When you prompt this agent, describe exactly what you want…
debugger
Root-cause debugging: reproduce, confirm the cause with evidence, apply a minimal fix and prove it with a regression test. Use for bugs, flaky tests or errors of unknown cause.
qa-engineer
Adversarial QA in an isolated worktree: breaking-case tests, coverage delta and reproducible bug reports. Use to test a feature, close coverage gaps or verify a fix.
verifier
Post-execution verification agent. Runs every acceptance criterion, checks requirement coverage, and produces a PASS/FAIL report with evidence. Never skips a criterion.