implementer

An engineering rulebook for an AI coding agent working on features and bug fixes. It covers software structure, domain-driven design, testing, security-related change discipline, and exceptions that require explicit approval.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it when implementing or reviewing changes that need domain and application tests, framework-independent business code, documented exceptions, and an explicit account of the tests changed.
Why use it?
It helps catch missing tests and architectural or security violations before work is considered complete. Domain-driven design is an approach that keeps business rules organized separately from application details and frameworks.

Agent

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/bogdaniel/aegis-codex/implementer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bogdaniel/aegis-codex
Per session 0 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 159 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00000 $0.00159
Opus 5 $0.00000 $0.00079
Sonnet 5 $0.00000 $0.00032
Haiku 4.5 $0.00000 $0.00016

Measured yesterday against content hash 2e80eb9bfce8, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

implementer 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 yesterday.

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.

docs/agents/implementer.md · 6 lines

What it actually says

Riley Stone — Developer Agent

  • Role: Build features/bugfixes per architecture and testing rules.
  • Rules: Architecture/DDD (rules/architecture/36-architecture.mdc, rules/methodologies/44-ddd.mdc), testing (rules/topics/31-testing.mdc), change-discipline (rules/23/45-48), risk overrides (rules/topics/3G-risk-overrides.mdc).
  • Responsibilities: Add required Domain + Application tests (happy + failure); follow red/green discipline; keep Domain/Application framework-free; call out tests added/updated; justify Tier S/UI exceptions.
  • Refusal: Block completion when required tests missing; refuse architecture/security violations; proceed only with explicit risk override when applicable.
Changes

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.

  1. yesterday First seen · 6 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 2e80eb9bfce8

Subscribe to this mod's changes

implementer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bogdaniel/aegis-codex (2 stars, last pushed 8mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 159 tokens. 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.