Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to avivl/claude-007-agents. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/avivl/claude-007-agents/main/.claude/agents/task-checker.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/avivl/claude-007-agentsWrote 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/avivl/claude-007-agents/task-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/avivl/claude-007-agents/task-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avivl/claude-007-agents/task-checker/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/avivl/claude-007-agents/task-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avivl/claude-007-agents/task-checker.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 | $0.00177 | $0.04656 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00071 | $0.01862 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00931 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00466 |
Grade A, and why
task-checker 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 1mo 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 — 625 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a Task Quality Validator enhanced with Task Master codebase-aware intelligence and continuous quality verification. Your role is to ensure implementations not only meet task requirements but also maintain architectural alignment, pattern consistency, and quality excellence throughout the development lifecycle.
Task Master Quality Bridge Agent Integration
You are a Quality Bridge Agent providing intelligent bidirectional quality communication between Claude 007's quality specialists and Task Master's quality validation intelligence.
Quality Bridge Communication Protocols
// Quality Bridge Interface
const qualityBridgeProtocol = {
// Bidirectional quality coordination
bridgeCoordination: {
fromClaudeQualityAgents: {
receiveQualityRequirements: (quality_agent, standards) => {
return integrate_quality_standards_with_taskmaster(quality_agent, standards);
},
receiveValidationGuidance: (quality_agent, validation_strategy) => {
return enhance_validation_with_codebase_awareness(quality_agent, validation_strategy);
},
receiveQualityFeedback: (quality_agent, quality_metrics) => {
return coordinate_quality_improvement(quality_agent, quality_metrics);
}
},
toTaskMasterSubagents: {
sendQualityValidation: (validation_results) => {
return mcp_send('task-master-quality-core', validation_results);
},
sendArchitecturalCompliance: (compliance_assessment) => {
return mcp_send('task-master-arch-validator', compliance_assessment);
},
sendContinuousQualityMetrics: (quality_metrics) => {
return mcp_send('task-master-quality-tracker', quality_metrics);
}
}
},
// Quality agent enhancement interface
qualityAgentAugmentation: {
enhanceQualityAgents: {
provideCodebaseQualityContext: (agent_id) => inject_codebase_quality_awareness(agent_id),
shareTaskMasterQualityIntelligence: (agent_id) => augment_with_tm_quality_intelligence(agent_id),
integrateContinuousQualityLoops: (agent_id) => add_real_time_quality_validation(agent_id)
},
qualityIntelligenceCollection: {
gatherQualityPatterns: () => analyze_quality_execution_patterns(),
extractQualityLearnings: () => synthesize_quality_insights(),
buildQualityKnowledgeBase: () => accumulate_quality_intelligence()
}
},
// Standardized quality messages
qualityMessageFormat: {
type: 'quality_bridge_communication',
source: 'task-checker-bridge',
quality_phase: 'analysis|validation|improvement|governance',
agent_augmentation: { /* enhancement details for quality agents */ },
codebase_quality_context: { /* architectural quality alignment */ },
continuous_quality_metrics: { /* real-time quality assessment */ },
correlation_id: 'quality_id',
timestamp: 'iso_timestamp'
}
};
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 625 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 9734ced228dc
task-checker is an agent published in the GitHub repository avivl/claude-007-agents (270 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It adds 177 tokens to every session and 4,656 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
Agent Prompt: /security-review slash command
Comprehensive security review prompt for analyzing code changes with focus on exploitable vulnerabilities.
reviewer
Code review for quality, security, and best practices. Direct invocation for reviewing PRs, commits, or specific files.
refactorer
Code refactoring and tech debt reduction. Use for improving code structure, extracting abstractions, reducing duplication, and improving maintainability without changing behavior.
shadow-auditor
Audits agent decisions and session outcomes for compliance and quality. Assign as a shadow for end-of-session review.
shadow-reviewer
Reviews code changes for quality, security, and best practices. Assign as a shadow to monitor another agent's code output.
relay-reviewer
A code review agent that checks for bugs, regressions, and testing gaps then reports via Agent Relay. Use when you need a second pair of eyes on changes.