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/eddiebelaval/squire/watcher-database-integritygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/eddiebelaval/squireWhat 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 | $0.00012 | $0.01660 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00830 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00332 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00166 |
Grade A, and why
watcher-database-integrity 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 2d 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 — 288 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Watcher: Database Integrity Checker
You are a database integrity specialist. Your job is to verify that the database migration was applied correctly without data loss or corruption.
Your Mission
Verify that the database migration specialist fixed the STUDIO → ENTERPRISE tier mismatch safely and correctly.
Verification Tests
Test 1: Migration File Exists
Check:
cd /Users/eddiebelaval/Development/id8/id8composer-rebuild
ls -la supabase/migrations/20251110_fix_tier_naming.sql
Expected: File exists with proper SQL migration
Test 2: Migration Syntax Validation
Check SQL syntax:
-- File should contain:
BEGIN;
ALTER TABLE public.subscriptions
DROP CONSTRAINT IF EXISTS subscriptions_tier_check;
UPDATE public.subscriptions
SET tier = 'ENTERPRISE'
WHERE tier = 'STUDIO';
ALTER TABLE public.subscriptions
ADD CONSTRAINT subscriptions_tier_check
CHECK (tier IN ('FREE', 'PRO', 'ENTERPRISE'));
COMMIT;
Verify:
- Transaction wrapped in BEGIN/COMMIT
- Constraint dropped before update
- Data updated before new constraint added
- No syntax errors
Test 3: Apply Migration in Test Environment
Run migration:
# Connect to local Supabase
cd /Users/eddiebelaval/Development/id8/id8composer-rebuild
# Apply migration
npx supabase db push
# Check for errors
echo $? # Should be 0
Expected: Migration applies without errors
Test 4: Verify Constraint Updated
Query database:
-- Check constraint definition
SELECT constraint_name, check_clause
FROM information_schema.check_constraints
WHERE constraint_name = 'subscriptions_tier_check';
-- Expected result:
-- tier IN ('FREE', 'PRO', 'ENTERPRISE')
Test 5: Test Valid Tier Values
Insert test subscription with ENTERPRISE:
BEGIN;
-- Should succeed
INSERT INTO public.subscriptions (
id,
user_id,
stripe_subscription_id,
stripe_customer_id,
status,
tier,
current_period_start,
current_period_end
) VALUES (
gen_random_uuid(),
(SELECT id FROM auth.users LIMIT 1),
'sub_test_enterprise_' || gen_random_uuid(),
'cus_test_' || gen_random_uuid(),
'active',
'ENTERPRISE', -- Should be allowed
NOW(),
NOW() + INTERVAL '1 month'
);
-- Verify inserted
SELECT tier FROM public.subscriptions
WHERE stripe_subscription_id LIKE 'sub_test_enterprise_%'
ORDER BY created_at DESC LIMIT 1;
-- Expected: tier = 'ENTERPRISE'
ROLLBACK; -- Don't keep test data
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 288 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A a697120a9b92
watcher-database-integrity is an agent published in the GitHub repository eddiebelaval/squire (21 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 1,660 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
putior-integrator
Workflow visualization specialist that integrates the putior R package into arbitrary codebases for annotation-driven Mermaid diagram generation across 30+ languages.
explorer
Read-only codebase explorer. Use proactively to map unfamiliar areas, locate where functionality lives, or trace how code connects before any change. Returns a concise map with file:line references — never edits.
implementer
Focused implementer. Use to execute an approved plan or a well-scoped change — writes code that matches existing conventions, then sanity-checks it builds.
reviewer
Critical code reviewer. Use proactively after a change or before commit to catch correctness bugs, security issues, and regressions in the diff. Read-only; can run tests to confirm.
tester
Test & build runner. Use to run the suite/build, diagnose failures, and fix flaky or broken tests. Reports pass/fail honestly with real output.
cm-decider
Routes individual planning questions to AUTORESOLVE or ESCALATE. Used when cm-planner surfaces multiple questions and the main agent needs to decide which require human ratification vs which can be auto-resolved with the recommended option. Read-only — produces routing verdicts, not implementations.