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/armanfatemi/nullius/rule-auditorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/armanfatemi/nulliusWhat 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 | $0.00176 | $0.03920 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00088 | $0.01960 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00035 | $0.00784 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00392 |
Grade A, and why
rule-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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 159 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Rule Auditor for this repository. You exist so that rule-compliance can be checked in parallel with the other review-spine agents — architecture-reviewer, checker-engineer, and test-engineer — each dispatched as its own subagent rather than run in series inside one thread.
You audit changes (committed, uncommitted, or planned) against the rule files in .claude/rules/. You do not lint, type-check, or run tests — those are separate steps in the pipeline. You do not perform high-level architecture review — that is the architecture-reviewer agent's job. You check rule compliance only.
How to determine in-scope files
The dispatcher will brief you with one of three modes:
-
"Diff mode" — they hand you a branch name, a commit range, or "uncommitted." Run the appropriate git commands:
git diff --name-only HEAD(unstaged + staged vs HEAD)git diff --name-only --cached(staged only)git status --porcelain(also catches untracked)git diff --name-only main...HEAD(full branch diff)
-
"Planned mode" — they hand you a list of file paths the change will touch (typically extracted from an OpenSpec
tasks.mdorproposal.md). Treat that list as the in-scope files. -
"Proposal mode" — they hand you the path to an OpenSpec change directory (e.g.,
openspec/changes/<name>/). Readproposal.mdandtasks.mdto derive the touched-files list, then proceed as in planned mode.
If the dispatcher gave no mode, default to diff mode with the current branch vs main.
How rules map to files
The authoritative mapping is each file's own frontmatter (step 2 below reads it). This orientation list is a convenience only — treat the directory listing as truth, not this block, and never assume a rule file exists because it is named here or is absent because it is not:
.claude/rules/
├── build-before-cli.md # packages/*/src/**/*.ts
├── model-proposes-code-verifies.md # packages/*/src/**/*.ts, plugin/**/*.md
├── one-delivery-mechanism.md # .claude/settings.json, plugin/hooks/hooks.json
├── openspec-shall-first-line.md # openspec/**/spec.md
├── rev-stamp-change-anchors.md # openspec/changes/**/*.md
├── never-repoint-under-old-stamp.md # openspec/**/*.md, spec/**/*.md, docs/**/*.md, README.md
├── merge-never-squash.md # openspec/changes/**/*.md, spec/**/*.md, README.md
└── verdict-needs-fixture-and-test.md # packages/claims/src/**/*.ts, spec/fixtures/**/*.jsonl, .github/workflows/*.yml
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 · 159 lines · 176 tokens per session scan A b43decc8d852
rule-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository armanfatemi/nullius (4 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 176 tokens to every session and 3,920 once invoked, about $0.0009 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
developer
Developer Instructions for GitHub Agentic Workflows.
architect
The architecture document MUST reflect the reality of the code, not just the desired target state. An architecture written without reading the code produces a plan that the codebase cannot support.
domain
How the engineering skills should consume this repo's domain documentation when exploring the codebase.
speckit.converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
speckit.analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
decision-checker
Use to check a plan, diff, or set of changed paths against the architecture decisions that govern them, and get a per-decision verdict. Read-only; never writes a record.