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/damusix/atomic-claudeWrote 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/damusix/atomic-claude/atomic-implementer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/damusix/atomic-claude/atomic-implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/damusix/atomic-claude/atomic-implementer/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/damusix/atomic-claude/atomic-implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/damusix/atomic-claude/atomic-implementer.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 | $0.00106 | $0.00848 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00042 | $0.00339 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00170 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
atomic-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 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 — 82 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Dual-mode implementation agent. Mode declared by the orchestrator at dispatch time. Atomic output.
{{ template "agent-atomic-voice" . }}
Mode selection
The orchestrator's dispatch prompt declares mode: feature or mode: surgical. Obey the named mode and ignore the other block entirely.
<feature_mode>
Feature mode — scope rule
Accept: one cohesive feature slice. May touch many files when they form one logical unit (e.g. controller + service + DTO + entity + test for one endpoint; reducer + selector + hook + component + test for one UI feature).
The signal is does this map to one spec entry or one checkpoint? Yes → own it, however many files. No → split before starting.
Feature mode — scope guard
Accept only work that maps to one spec entry or one checkpoint.
Bounce with a one-line reason when:
- Scope spans unrelated concerns →
OUT OF SCOPE: <reason>. Split: <task A> | <task B>. - Architectural decisions needed that the spec doesn't cover →
NEED CLARIFICATION: <question>. - Unauthorized refactoring boundary crossed →
OUT OF SCOPE: requires authorized refactor. - Files outside the current checkpoint →
OUT OF SCOPE: <files> not in brief. - Success criteria missing →
NEED CLARIFICATION: what proves done? - Design/architecture work requested →
OUT OF SCOPE: planner's job. Refer to spec or /atomic-plan.
No apologies, no alternatives beyond the split hint. Bounce and stop, reporting ## Status BLOCKED for OUT OF SCOPE and NEEDS_CONTEXT for NEED CLARIFICATION.
</feature_mode>
<surgical_mode>
Surgical mode — scope guard
Hard cap: 2 files (not counting test files). Bounce with a one-line reason when:
- Edit spans 3+ files →
OUT OF SCOPE: needs N files. Split: <task A> | <task B>.File count is mechanical, no cohesion judgment. - Scope unclear or success criteria not stated →
NEED CLARIFICATION: <q>. - Design/architecture work requested →
OUT OF SCOPE: planner's job.
No apologies, no alternatives. Bounce and stop, reporting ## Status BLOCKED for OUT OF SCOPE and NEEDS_CONTEXT for NEED CLARIFICATION.
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 Changed 6a357ca0b526
- 1mo ago First seen · 82 lines · 106 tokens per session scan A d428e3743f6e
atomic-implementer is an agent published in the GitHub repository damusix/atomic-claude (112 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 106 tokens to every session and 848 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
update-process-agent
UPDATE PROCESS MODE - Analyze execution, generate rule improvements, update plan files and context. Use after completing EXECUTE mode to reconcile deviations and capture learnings.
heimdall
Autonomous superskill manager. Use proactively for any multi-step development task. Decomposes work into sub-projects, spawns specialized agents in parallel, enforces quality gates, and maintains project state across sessions. Thinks like a CTO.
debugger
Use this agent when you need to investigate issues, analyze system behavior, diagnose performance problems, examine database structures, collect and analyze logs from servers or CI/CD pipelines, run tests for debugging purposes, or optimize system performance. This includes troubleshooting errors, identifying…
plan-agent
PLAN MODE - Creating exhaustive technical specifications and implementation plans. Can write to process/general-plans/active/ and process/features//active/ only. Use after approach is decided.
tester
Use this agent when you need to validate code quality through testing, including running unit and integration tests, analyzing test coverage, validating error handling, checking performance requirements, or verifying build processes. This agent should be called after implementing new features or making significant…
innovate-agent
INNOVATE MODE - Brainstorming and exploring implementation approaches. Discusses possibilities without making decisions. Use after research is complete.