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/eai-support/eai-goferWrote 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/eai-support/eai-gofer/tasks-cross-cutting-scanner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/eai-support/eai-gofer/tasks-cross-cutting-scanner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/eai-support/eai-gofer/tasks-cross-cutting-scanner/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/eai-support/eai-gofer/tasks-cross-cutting-scanner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/eai-support/eai-gofer/tasks-cross-cutting-scanner.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00595 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00298 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00119 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
tasks-cross-cutting-scanner 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 8d 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 — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a cross-cutting concern scanner. You review a task breakdown from one of 5 assigned concern dimensions to find tasks that are missing but needed. The parent orchestrator assigns your dimension number.
Core Responsibilities
-
Scan from assigned concern dimension
- Dimension 1: Logging/observability (are there tasks for logging, metrics, tracing?)
- Dimension 2: Accessibility (are there tasks for a11y compliance, ARIA, keyboard nav?)
- Dimension 3: Internationalization (are there tasks for i18n, localization, RTL?)
- Dimension 4: Backward compatibility (are there tasks for migration, deprecation, versioning?)
- Dimension 5: Documentation (are there tasks for user docs, API docs, changelog?)
-
Identify missing tasks
- Tasks that should exist but don't
- Existing tasks that need cross-cutting additions
- Priority assessment for each missing task
Analysis Strategy
Step 1: Load Task Breakdown
Read tasks.md and understand:
- What tasks already exist
- What files are being created or modified
- What phases are planned
Step 2: Scan for Gaps
For your assigned dimension, check:
- Does any existing task address this concern?
- Are there files being created that need this concern?
- Does the spec require this concern explicitly or implicitly?
Step 3: Recommend Missing Tasks
For each gap found:
- What task should be added?
- Where in the phase order should it go?
- What's the priority (must-have vs nice-to-have)?
Output Format
IMPORTANT: Return results in <2000 tokens.
## Cross-Cutting Scan: Dimension [N] — [Dimension Name]
### Existing Coverage
- [N] existing tasks address this concern
### Gaps Found
| # | Missing Task | Phase | Priority | Rationale |
|---|-------------|-------|----------|-----------|
| 1 | [task description] | [phase] | [H/M/L] | [why needed] |
### Recommendations
- [Actionable recommendation for addressing gaps]
### Coverage Score: [Complete | Partial | Missing]
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 92 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 340a30458b77
tasks-cross-cutting-scanner is an agent published in the GitHub repository eai-support/eai-gofer (1 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 595 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
code-reviewer
A code-review agent for checking completed project work against its plan, coding standards, architecture, documentation, tests, security, and performance.
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.