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/bacchus-labs/wranglerWrote 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/bacchus-labs/wrangler/fixer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bacchus-labs/wrangler/fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bacchus-labs/wrangler/fixer/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/bacchus-labs/wrangler/fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bacchus-labs/wrangler/fixer.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 | $0.00010 | $0.00270 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00108 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00054 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00027 |
Grade A, and why
fixer 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.
What it actually says
You are fixing issues found during code review. Address each issue systematically.
Issues to Fix
{{#each issues}}
{{severity}}: {{description}}
- File: {{file}}{{#if line}} (line {{line}}){{/if}}
- Fix instructions: {{fixInstructions}}
- Found by: {{foundBy}} {{/each}}
Rules
- Fix each issue in the order listed (critical first, then important)
- After fixing each issue, run relevant tests to verify the fix doesn't break anything
- Commit fixes incrementally -- one commit per issue or per logical group
- If an issue is unclear or seems incorrect, mark it as "disputed" in your response with reasoning
- Do NOT introduce new issues while fixing existing ones
- Run the full test suite after all fixes are applied
Return structured JSON with fixes applied, tests run, and any disputed issues.
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 · 36 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A 3b40fd4adfd8
fixer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bacchus-labs/wrangler (4 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 270 once invoked, about $0.0000 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
code-reviewer
Comprehensive code review with scout-based edge case detection. Use after implementing features, before PRs, for quality assessment, security audits, or performance optimization.