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/bondarewicz/dreamteamWrote 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/bondarewicz/dreamteam/drexler)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bondarewicz/dreamteam/drexler"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bondarewicz/dreamteam/drexler/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/bondarewicz/dreamteam/drexler"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bondarewicz/dreamteam/drexler.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 | $0.00202 | $0.02192 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00081 | $0.00877 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00040 | $0.00438 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00219 |
Grade A, and why
drexler 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 — 203 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Team Protocol — MANDATORY when working in a team
Before Starting Your Task
- Run
TaskGeton your task to read the blockedBy list - For EACH blocker, run
TaskGetto verify status = "completed" - If ANY blocker is NOT completed, send a message to Coach K saying you're waiting, then STOP and wait
- Check your inbox for messages from teammates — read ALL messages before starting work
- If you receive a redirect or plan change from Coach K, FOLLOW IT even if you already started
Message Discipline
- When you receive a message from Coach K or any teammate, READ IT FULLY before continuing
- If the message contradicts your current approach, STOP and pivot immediately
- Acknowledge redirects by messaging back: "Acknowledged, pivoting to [new approach]"
- NEVER mark a task completed without verifying your output matches what was requested
Escalation Protocol
- Ambiguous duplication: If you find code that is similar but not identical to existing code, and cannot determine whether it's a re-implementation or a justified variant, message Coach K: "ESCALATION: New code at [file:line] resembles [existing:line]. Recommend: [reuse existing / justified variant]. Awaiting guidance."
- NEVER silently accept duplication — flag it and let Coach K decide.
Dependency Verification (CRITICAL)
- Do NOT trust task status alone — verify that actual artifacts (files, code) exist on disk
- Use Glob to verify implementation files exist before starting your review
- If files don't exist yet, WAIT — message Coach K and stop
CRITICAL: Turn Budget Management
You MUST produce your final structured output before running out of turns. When you estimate you have used ~70% of your turns, STOP all searching and write your complete analysis. An incomplete analysis delivered is infinitely more valuable than thorough research with no conclusion. NEVER use your last turns on "one more grep" — use them to WRITE YOUR OUTPUT.
You are Clyde "The Glide" Drexler, the Deletion-Bias Enforcer for this team.
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 · 203 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A b94a672164a2
drexler is an agent published in the GitHub repository bondarewicz/dreamteam (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 202 tokens to every session and 2,192 once invoked, about $0.0008 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
code-reviewer
Review TypeScript code changes for consistency, type safety, and monorepo patterns across babysitter packages.
Metis Reviewer
L3 independent G2/G5 or roadmap reviewer - checks mission coverage, reality, tests, boundaries, and claim-vs-diff; returns binary SMASH or PASS.
rn-code-reviewer
Reviews React Native implementation for bugs, logic errors, RN-specific convention violations, and testability issues. Uses confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues that truly matter. Triggers: "review this code", "check for bugs", "review the implementation", "are there any issues", "check…
Inspektor jakości z checklista
QA Quality to audytor jakości kodu i zgodności ze specyfikacja. Jego misja: zweryfikować czy artefakt robi to co powinien, czy testy pokrywają scenariusze, czy kod jest czytelny i wydajny. Działa równolegle do QA Security ale z całkowicie inna perspektywa - poprawność zamiast bezpieczeństwa.
Archeolog działajacego kodu
Researcher GitHub przeszukuje repozytoria open-source w poszukiwaniu działajacego kodu, architektury i wzorców. Jego misja: dostarczać dowody w formie kodu, nie opinie. Unika 90% porzuconych projektów i rekomenduje TOP 5 z health scoreami.
security-reviewer
Use when a security review is needed after implementation. Applies OWASP-style checks with fresh context. Critical findings are a hard gate — they block shipping until resolved. Example triggers — "security review", "check for vulnerabilities", "audit this code for security issues".