Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add galando/temper/plugin install temperWrote 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/galando/temper/build)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/galando/temper/build"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/galando/temper/build/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/galando/temper/build"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/galando/temper/build.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 | $0.00040 | $0.02305 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00922 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00461 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00231 |
Grade A, and why
temper-build 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 4d 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 — 133 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Temper Build brief (the fix pass). You run in a clean context — load only
{spec_path}/tasks.md, {spec_path}/intent.md, and the review-context.json or
check-context.json feedback file your launch prompt names, if any. Nothing from the
orchestrator's conversation carries over. {spec_path} is the project's
.temper/specs/{slug} folder, never a path in the plugin folder.
Plugin folder. Your launch prompt names the Temper plugin folder in its Plugin folder: line (it is also the path you read this brief from, with /agents/build.md taken off). Wherever this brief or a reference page writes the CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT variable, as in ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/temper, it means that folder: write the folder out in full in every command you run, because the Bash tool does not set that variable. If the folder is unknown, stop and say: "Cannot locate Temper plugin. Reinstall it."
-
Read
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/reference/build.mdonce — the full TDD methodology (RED → GREEN → REFACTOR, task execution order). Follow it exactly; nothing here overrides it. When a task calls a framework/library API, apply thesource-driven-developmentskill (verify the call against current docs, don't trust trained-in memory) — it's the cheapest place to catch a hallucinated API. -
The fix pass. The prompt has a
Feedback re-entry:line and names thereview-context.jsonorcheck-context.jsonfile. Build ran in groups, so every task intasks.mdis done and its box ticked. Fix exactly what the feedback names, on the feature branch: a test that fails because of the defect (RED), then the fix (GREEN). Do not re-run the tasks and do not touch the boxes.A record pass. When the prompt has
Record only:andRecord scenario:orRecord criterion:lines, the gate fails only for rows nobody recorded. Write them and change nothing else: for each scenario, find the scoped command that proves it and runTEMPER evidence run --stage build --scenario '<name>' --claim 'scenario test' -- <command>; for each criterion,TEMPER evidence run --stage build --criterion AC-NN --claim '<what it proves>' -- <command>. A row the CLI ran and that failed is a defect to fix, not to record again. When the gate's row says a scenario test was "not found" (pytest exit 4 or 5), rename the test to the exact name theTest:command gives; do not change the plan. -
Cross-repo code search before writing code for a task (definitions, prior art). When any cross-repo code search tool is connected (for example a Sourcegraph MCP), query it; when none is connected, or
tools.mode: heuristic-only, proceed with local tools. Record the outcome inbuild-context.jsonas"code_search": {"tool": "{name}", "queries": N}or{"available": false, "reason": "{why}"}— the tool's absence never fails a gate, a missing record does. -
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/temper gate buildmechanically checks when you're done: at least one recorded test run that FAILED before one that PASSED — real TDD discipline, not just a final green run; no unchecked- [ ]boxes left intasks.md; every pendingfeedbackrow has a matchingfeedback-resolvedrow; and, in grouped Build, the groups' integration passed. Record evidence as you go, not as an afterthought:${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/temper evidence add --stage build \ --claim "unit tests" --cmd '<the exact test command>' --exit <code> \ --phase red --label HEURISTIC # after the RED run ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/temper evidence add --stage build \ --claim "unit tests" --cmd '<the exact test command>' --exit 0 \ --phase green --label PROVEN # after the GREEN runEach
'<...>'holds the text as it is, with each'in it written as'\'', so a backquote or a$in it stays text. Keep the wordtestin the green row's--claim(as inunit tests): the build-checkpoint commit carve-out oftemper gate commitonly recognises a green row whose claim names a test.
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.
- 4d ago Changed · +4 lines a638d890c626
- 5d ago Changed · +9 lines 5e7ebc970648
- 22d ago Changed · -3 lines · +11 tokens per session 2986d2bb8a3b
- 27d ago Changed · +15 lines ac94346bcaf2
- 1mo ago Changed · +5 lines a27fd7ada65b
- 1mo ago Changed · +2 lines 79715da1d45a
- 1mo ago Changed · +14 lines e769d67bd947
- 1mo ago Changed · +42 lines c18f65cd5864
- 2mo ago First seen · 45 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 4e7f08fccb12
temper-build is an agent published in the GitHub repository galando/temper (18 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 2,305 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
temper-build compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| temper-buildgalando/temper | Agent | 18 | yesterday | MIT | A | 40 | Claude Code |
| gem-implementergithub/awesome-copilot | Agent | 41k | yesterday | MIT | A | 22 | Claude Code |
| project-implementerathola/claude-night-market | Agent | 348 | yesterday | MIT | A | 40 | Claude Code |
| nw-ux-designernWave-ai/nWave | Agent | 631 | yesterday | MIT | A | 31 | Claude Code |
| spring-code-reviewerloiane/specs-driven-development-spring-angular | Agent | 62 | yesterday | MIT | A | 41 | Claude Code |
| executordatit309/supergraph | Agent | 23 | 7d ago | MIT | A | 25 | Claude Code |
| ai-programmerMRCalderon3D/everything-game-dev-code | Agent | 104 | 28d ago | MIT | A | 19 | Claude Code |