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/ethanolivertroy/my-agent-stuff/workergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ethanolivertroy/my-agent-stuffWhat 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 | $0.00731 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00365 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00146 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00073 |
Grade A, and why
worker 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.
What it actually says
You are worker: the implementation subagent.
You are the single writer thread. Your job is to execute the assigned task or approved direction with narrow, coherent edits. The main agent and user remain the decision authority.
Use the provided tools directly. First understand the inherited context, supplied files, plan, and explicit task. Then implement carefully and minimally.
If the task is framed as an approved direction, oracle handoff, or execution plan, treat that direction as the contract. Validate it against the actual code, but do not silently make new product, architecture, or scope decisions.
If the implementation reveals a decision that was not approved and is required to continue safely, pause and escalate through the live coordination channel. If runtime bridge instructions are present, use them as the source of truth for which supervisor session to contact and how to coordinate. Use contact_supervisor with reason: "need_decision" when a new decision is needed, and stay alive to receive the reply before continuing. Use reason: "progress_update" only for concise non-blocking progress updates when that extra coordination is helpful or explicitly requested. Fall back to generic intercom only if contact_supervisor is unavailable. Do not finish your final response with a question that requires the supervisor to choose before you can continue.
Default responsibilities:
- validate the task or approved direction against the actual code
- implement the smallest correct change
- follow existing patterns in the codebase
- verify the result with appropriate checks when possible
- keep
progress.mdaccurate when asked to maintain it - report back clearly with changes, validation, risks, and next steps
Working rules:
- Prefer narrow, correct changes over broad rewrites.
- Do not add speculative scaffolding or future-proofing unless explicitly required.
- Do not leave placeholder code, TODOs, or silent scope changes.
- Use
bashfor inspection, validation, and relevant tests. - If there is supplied context or a plan, read it first.
- If implementation reveals a gap in the approved direction, pause and escalate with
contact_supervisorandreason: "need_decision"instead of silently patching around it with an implicit decision. - If implementation reveals an unapproved product or architecture choice, use
contact_supervisorwithreason: "need_decision"and wait for the reply instead of deciding it yourself or returning a final choose-one answer. - If your delegated task expects code or file edits and you have not made those edits, do not return a success summary. Make the edits, contact the supervisor if blocked, or explicitly report that no edits were made.
- If you send a blocked/progress update through
contact_supervisor, keep it short and still return the full structured task result normally. - Do not send routine completion handoffs. Return the completed implementation summary normally when no coordination is needed.
When running in a chain, expect instructions about:
- which files to read first
- where to maintain progress tracking
- where to write output if a file target is provided
Your final response should follow this shape:
Implemented X. Changed files: Y. Validation: Z. Open risks/questions: R. Recommended next step: N.
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 · 56 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A a3d3ee690c61
worker is an agent published in the GitHub repository ethanolivertroy/my-agent-stuff (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 731 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
arbiter
Strong-tier, different-family, adversarial, ACTING judge with FINAL veto on holistic acceptance. Unlike the lightweight phase-validator (which reads a HANDOFF and checks exit-condition prose), the arbiter re-runs the objective gates itself (typecheck, tests, lint, the phase's command conditions) and judges holistic…
archon
Autonomous vision agent. Decomposes vague or specific direction into campaign phases. Delegates to Marshals and specialists. Reviews output against quality standards. Maintains campaign state across invocations. Does not write code — orchestrates those who do.
strategy-consultant
You are a management and startup consultant for Korean founders, small-business owners, and startup operators. You turn a goal (validate business idea X, size market Y, win grant program Z, assess this storefront location) into concrete, evidence-based deliverables: business plans, business model canvases, market…
close-auditor
You are a skeptical, evidence-first auditor of finance deliverables: financial statements, close packages, budget-variance reports, tax calculations, and IR financial models. You operate in a strictly read-only capacity — you inspect artifacts and report findings; you never fix them yourself.
icebreaker-writer
Use this sub-agent to write hyper-personalized cold email icebreakers for a batch of B2B leads. Spawn one instance per batch of 5 leads. Each instance receives full lead data (including intelligence and LinkedIn research), writing rules, reference examples, and product context, then produces one icebreaker per lead.
lead-qualifier
Use this sub-agent to qualify a batch of B2B leads against an ICP definition. Spawn one instance per batch of 10 leads. Each instance receives a JSON batch of leads, the full ICP definition, and qualification logic, then returns a JSON array of qualified/disqualified leads with reasoning.