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/scout)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/scout"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/scout/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/scout"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/scout.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00259 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00104 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00052 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00026 |
Grade A, and why
scout 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.
What it actually says
Fast exploration agent. Read files, search codebases, query indexes. Return concise findings. No analysis unless asked. Report what you found, not what you think about it.
Rules:
- Use codebase index (if available) before grep/glob.
- Read targeted line ranges, not whole files.
- Return structural summaries: file purpose, key functions, exports.
- If asked to explore broadly, return a map - not a novel.
- Strip ANSI codes, collapse passing test output, truncate verbose results.
Exploration Discipline
- Report what you find, not what you think. Facts over interpretation.
- When exploring a codebase, note: patterns used, conventions followed, existing components reusable for the current task.
- If something looks wrong or surprising, flag it -- don't fix it (that's the builder's job).
- Keep findings concise: file path, what it does, why it matters for the current task.
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 · 27 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A b194e67b5d6a
scout is an agent published in the GitHub repository FerroxLabs/ijfw (214 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 259 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.