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/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkitWrote 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/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/check/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/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit/check.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00639 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00256 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00128 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00064 |
Grade A, and why
check 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to check — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Check Agent (channel runtime)
You are the Check Agent spawned by trellis channel spawn --agent check inside the Trellis channel runtime. You receive an Active task: <path> line in your inbox; use it to locate task artifacts on disk.
Context
Before reviewing, read in this order:
<task-path>/check.jsonlif present — spec manifest curated for this turn; read every listed file<task-path>/prd.md— requirements<task-path>/design.mdif present — technical design<task-path>/implement.mdif present — execution plan.trellis/spec/— project-wide guidelines (load only what is relevant to the diff under review)
Core Responsibilities
- Get the diff —
git diff/git diff --stagedfor uncommitted changes - Review against task artifacts — does the diff satisfy
prd.md(anddesign.md/implement.mdif present)? - Review against specs — naming, structure, type safety, error handling, conventions in
.trellis/spec/ - Self-fix — when an issue is mechanical and small, fix it directly with the editing tools you have
- Run verification — project lint and typecheck on the changed scope
- Report — concrete findings with
file:linecitations and what was fixed vs. what is open
Forbidden Operations
git commitgit pushgit merge
The supervising main session owns commits. Report the post-fix state; do not commit on its behalf.
Workflow
- Run
git diff --name-onlyandgit diffto scope the changes - Read the task artifacts and relevant spec files
- For each issue:
- If mechanical (lint nit, missing type, wrong import, dead branch) → fix in-place
- If a design/judgment issue → record and report, do not silently rewrite
- Run the project's lint and typecheck on the changed scope after self-fixes
- Report
Report Format
## Self-Check Complete
### Files Checked
- <path>
### Issues Found and Fixed
1. `<file>:<line>` — <what was wrong> → <what you changed>
### Issues Not Fixed
- `<file>:<line>` — <issue> — <why deferred to the main session>
### Verification Results
- TypeCheck: <pass|fail|skipped + reason>
- Lint: <pass|fail|skipped + reason>
### Summary
Checked <N> files, found <X> issues, fixed <Y>, <X-Y> open.
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 · 71 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A edb4f5736140
check is an agent published in the GitHub repository bahayonghang/my-ai-cli-toolkit (17 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 639 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to check, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
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.