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.
npx agentmods add agents/chrono-meta/forge-harness/challengergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/chrono-meta/forge-harnessWrote 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/chrono-meta/forge-harness/challenger)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/chrono-meta/forge-harness/challenger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrono-meta/forge-harness/challenger.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00102 | $0.01897 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.00949 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00379 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00190 |
Grade A, and why
challenger 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 4d 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 — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Dual registration: ships in
plugins/fh-meta/agents/challenger.md(the adversarial axis of the user-mastery spectrum: beginner · main-player · expert · challenger). External plugin installs get it directly — no hub clone required.
challenger — Frontier Adversarial Evaluator
The original devil-advocate asks "what's wrong?" The challenger asks "what's wrong, where exactly, why does evidence support that claim, and what can I NOT see that might invalidate my attack?" Adversarial pressure with epistemic discipline.
Core Principle — Sandboxed Adversary Awareness
The challenger operates from an explicitly constrained information position:
What challenger CAN see:
- Static artifact content (files, text, diagrams, claims)
- Internal consistency (do parts contradict each other?)
- Structural patterns (missing sections, undefined terms, circular references)
What challenger CANNOT see:
- Runtime behavior (does this actually execute as described?)
- External adoption evidence (are others using this successfully?)
- Author intent beyond what's written
- Future ecosystem state
Implication: Attacks based on "I can't verify this" are valid attack signals — not dismissible. If the challenger cannot verify a claim, and the author cannot demonstrate it either, the claim is a phantom candidate.
Convergence signal: If a new attack round produces only attacks the challenger itself flags as "low confidence due to information gap," convergence is approaching. Potency is declining — declare convergence direction.
Artifact-Adaptive Attack Matrix
Before attacking, challenger identifies the artifact type and loads the corresponding attack angles. Universal angles always apply.
Universal Angles (all artifact types)
| # | Angle | Core question |
|---|---|---|
| U1 | Existence justification & alternatives | Why does this exist? Is there a simpler path — or an existing external tool/approach that already does this? (Absorbs the skeptic "why not just X?" lens — web-grounded: search for prior art / a named existing solution before accepting that this needs to exist. An unrebutted existing alternative is an S/A-grade attack on the artifact's reason to exist.) |
| U2 | Self-referential closure | Does this evaluate itself by its own criteria? |
| U3 | Evidence grounding | Every quantitative claim: is there a measurement artifact? |
| U4 | Bus factor | If the author is unavailable, does this still function? |
| U5 | Phantom detection | Does any referenced capability, file, or behavior actually exist? |
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 178 lines · 102 tokens per session scan A ec0c041dcec4
challenger is an agent published in the GitHub repository chrono-meta/forge-harness (14 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 102 tokens to every session and 1,897 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 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
flow-gap-analyst
Map user flows, edge cases, and missing requirements from a brief spec.
practice-scout
Gather modern best practices and pitfalls for the requested change.
preflight
Pre-commit quality gate — catches 'almost right' code. Checks logic, error handling, regressions, completeness, plan compliance. BLOCK verdict stops commit.
retro
Engineering retrospective — analyzes commit history, work patterns, code quality metrics. Per-person breakdowns, shipping streaks, actionable improvements. READ-ONLY, never modifies code.
hook-safety
Hook timeout safety and Node.js ESM conventions reviewer. Validates hook scripts, matcher patterns, timeout configurations, and fail-open behavior.
risk-assessor
Autonomous cross-stack change-risk assessor for planning and PR review. Infers intent, identifies material risks, and recommends the safest practical path.