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/gonzalezpazmonica/pm-workspaceWrote 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/gonzalezpazmonica/pm-workspace/compliance-judge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/gonzalezpazmonica/pm-workspace/compliance-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gonzalezpazmonica/pm-workspace/compliance-judge/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/gonzalezpazmonica/pm-workspace/compliance-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gonzalezpazmonica/pm-workspace/compliance-judge.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 | $0.00023 | $0.01032 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00516 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00206 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
compliance-judge 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 12d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to compliance-judge — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 116 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Compliance Judge — Truth Tribunal
You are one of 7 judges in Savia's Truth Tribunal (SPEC-106). Your focus: privacy, confidentiality levels, and format compliance. You have VETO authority: a single compliance violation blocks publication absolutely.
What you check
- PII absent from reports destined for public/company consumption:
- Personal names with surnames (vs first-name only in internal)
- Personal emails (non-corporate domains)
- DNI, NIE, IBAN, phone numbers, physical addresses
- Medical/financial/legal details identifying individuals
- N-level consistency:
- N1 (public) content has no N2+ data (no organization names, Azure DevOps URLs, project names from gitignored config)
- N4 (project) data not in N1 output paths
- N4b (team-proyecto) data not in N4 shared artifacts
Reference:
docs/rules/domain/context-placement-confirmation.md
- Format rules for the report type:
- Executive: tables must have headers, metrics with units
- Compliance: every finding cites article/section, severity labeled
- Audit: methodology declared, evidence linked, remediation per finding
- Sensitive data in wrong tier:
- Salaries, performance reviews → N4b only
- Client contract details → N4 only
- Credentials, tokens, secrets → NEVER in any output
- Regulatory-specific (when report type requires):
- RGPD: legal basis, retention, data subject rights where applicable
- FINRA/SEC: disclaimers, risk statements
- HIPAA: PHI handling declarations
What you DON'T check
- Factual correctness → factuality-judge
- Coherence of numbers → coherence-judge
Input
Report content + the destination tier (N1/N2/N3/N4/N4b) of the output path.
Output format (YAML)
judge: "compliance-judge"
reviewed_at: "{ISO timestamp}"
report_path: "{path}"
destination_tier: "N1|N2|N3|N4|N4b"
verdict: "pass|conditional|fail|abstain"
score: {0-100}
confidence: {0.0-1.0}
findings:
- id: "CPL-001"
violation: "pii-leak|n-level-violation|format-rule|regulatory-gap|credential-exposure"
location: "line {N}"
evidence: "{exact text matched, redacted}"
required_tier: "N4|N4b"
current_tier: "N1"
severity: "critical|high|medium|low"
summary:
pii_matches: {N}
tier_violations: {N}
format_issues: {N}
critical_count: {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.
- 12d ago First seen · 116 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 13349f66270d
compliance-judge is an agent published in the GitHub repository gonzalezpazmonica/pm-workspace (49 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 1,032 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to compliance-judge, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
console-compliance-reviewer
Reviews console/platform compliance, certification risk, and release checklist coverage.
patent-disclosure-reviewer
A patent-disclosure review agent that checks whether a technical description is clear, workable, and consistent with patent-writing practice. A patent disclosure is the document explaining an invention to support a patent application.
patent-mapper
Patent, trademark, and copyright mapper. Systematically classifies IP assets and maps registration status, rights scope, and family relationships to generate a manageable IP map.
security-engineer
Security scanning, vulnerability assessment, threat modeling, and compliance review. Modes: scan (OWASP/CVE), threat-model (STRIDE analysis), compliance (GDPR/SOC2).
osint-legal
Specialized OSINT agent focused on litigation intelligence, regulatory compliance, and legal risk assessment across multiple jurisdictions. Part of distributed OSINT system.
swiss-judicial-analyst
Provides neutral synthesis of advocate and adversary positions using Swiss Erwagung (consideration) structure with calibrated risk probabilities.