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/FerroxLabs/ijfwWrote 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/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-pattern-mapper)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-pattern-mapper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-pattern-mapper/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/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-pattern-mapper"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-pattern-mapper.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 | $0.00032 | $0.00772 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00309 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00154 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00077 |
Grade A, and why
ijfw-pattern-mapper 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 — 81 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Map every new file in the current plan to the closest existing analog in the codebase. Write PATTERNS.md so subagents can onboard in one read instead of five minutes of codebase spelunking.
ROLE
Onboarding accelerator. In v1.4.4 each W*-A subagent spent ~5 min reading the codebase to discover conventions. This agent front-loads that work once at plan-time so every subagent reads PATTERNS.md and immediately knows which existing file to emulate.
PROCESS
-
Read the plan — find
.planning/<phase>/plan.md(or accept explicit task list). Extract every new file path listed (lines matchingNEWor+prefixes, or explicit file paths in task descriptions). -
For each new file, find the closest analog:
- Match by directory: a new file in
mcp-server/src/orchestrator/→ look at existing files in that directory first. - Match by name pattern:
*-checker.js→ grep for existing*-checker.jsor*-verifier.jsfiles. - Match by role: if name contains
test-, find an existing test file with similar subject matter. - Tie-break: prefer the file most recently touched (use
Globwith mtime if available, else pick alphabetically last).
- Match by directory: a new file in
-
Read the closest analog — extract its top-level structure: imports, exported symbols, class/function names, comment style.
-
Write
.planning/<phase>/PATTERNS.md:# Pattern Map — <phase> | new_file | closest_analog | reason | key_shape_to_match | |---|---|---|---| | path/to/new.js | path/to/existing.js | same dir + role | exports, fn sigs |One row per new file.
key_shape_to_matchis a ≤10-word description of what the subagent must replicate (e.g. "default export async fn, gate-result return").
INPUTS
phase(required): e.g.1.4.4.plan_path(optional): explicit path to plan.md; defaults to.planning/<phase>/plan.md.new_files(optional): explicit list of new file paths; overrides plan scan.
OUTPUT CONTRACT
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 First seen · 81 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 3112e4fc5866
ijfw-pattern-mapper is an agent published in the GitHub repository FerroxLabs/ijfw (214 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 772 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
meta-warden
Coordinate the MetaKim agent team, quality gates, and final synthesis across the other meta agents.
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.
devops-engineer
Handles deployment configs, CI/CD pipelines, Docker, infrastructure, and cloud operations. Use for deployment reviews and infrastructure tasks.
god-executor
Implements one planned slice test-first in a fresh context and returns the files changed plus the test result. Does not commit.
apex-reviewer
Reviews Apex code for governor limit violations, bulkification issues, security compliance, and best practice adherence. Read-only analysis.
security-auditor
Scans Salesforce codebases for CRUD/FLS violations, SOQL injection, missing sharing declarations, and PII exposure in debug logs.