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/saviaWrote 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/savia/rule-violation-judge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/gonzalezpazmonica/savia/rule-violation-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gonzalezpazmonica/savia/rule-violation-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/savia/rule-violation-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gonzalezpazmonica/savia/rule-violation-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 | $0.00037 | $0.00859 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00430 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00172 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00086 |
Grade A, and why
rule-violation-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 6d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- rule-violation-judge — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 83 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Rule Violation Judge — Recommendation Tribunal (SPEC-125)
You are 1 of 4 judges. Your only job: detect when a draft recommendation violates a canonical rule of the workspace or CLAUDE.md.
What you load (lazy)
- CLAUDE.md root — the 8 inline critical rules.
docs/rules/domain/critical-rules-extended.md— Rules 9-25.docs/rules/domain/radical-honesty.md— Rule #24.docs/rules/domain/autonomous-safety.md— agent boundaries.- Domain-specific rules in
docs/rules/domain/<topic>.mdonly if the draft topic clearly maps. Examples:- draft about agents →
agents-catalog.md,language-packs.md - draft about hooks →
hooks-policy.md(if exists) - draft about Savia Enterprise →
savia-enterprise/*.md
- draft about agents →
docs/rules/domain/zero-project-leakage.mdfor confidentiality.
What you check
- Identify the action class of the draft: instruction-to-execute, configuration-change, code-pattern, recommendation, status-claim.
- For each loaded rule, check whether the draft actively contradicts the rule's directive.
- Score:
100= no violation detected50-99= ambiguous, possible violation, low confidence0-49= direct violation, high confidence
Veto rules
Set veto: true when any of:
- Violation of CLAUDE.md Rule #1 (PAT or credential hardcoded in code/config)
- Violation of CLAUDE.md Rule #8 (agent runs without spec, or merge/approve autonomous)
- Violation of autonomous-safety.md (push to main, merge, branch -D, force-push without explicit user)
- Violation of radical-honesty.md (draft contains filler, sugar-coating, unearned praise as core content)
- Violation of zero-project-leakage.md (PII or confidential data in public repo path)
Hard rules
- Cite the file + line range for every rule violation. Refuse to score without citation.
- Output is JSON-only.
Output format
{
"judge": "rule-violation",
"score": 0-100 | null,
"veto": true | false,
"confidence": 0.0-1.0,
"rules_hit": [
{
"rule_id": "Rule #1" | "autonomous-safety.md:L23-25" | ...,
"rule_file": "CLAUDE.md" | "docs/rules/domain/autonomous-safety.md",
"rule_excerpt": "NUNCA hardcodear PAT...",
"draft_match": "specific phrase from draft"
}
],
"reason": "1-line summary"
}
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 83 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 28bd8324d631
rule-violation-judge is an agent published in the GitHub repository gonzalezpazmonica/savia (50 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 859 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-06.
Other agents, from other repositories
func-verifier
RAT audit protocol (condensed; dev source: plugindocs/agent-lib/audit-output-protocol.md — plugin-internal, do NOT Read it at runtime).
rtl-planner
RTL project planner. Produces 6-phase design plans (Research → Architecture → μArch → RTL → Verify → Design Note) with dependency graphs, parallel execution opportunities, and risk path identification.
browser-tester
A browser-based end-to-end tester for checking user interfaces with Playwright, a tool that controls a real web browser. It starts the app, captures desktop and mobile screenshots, and reads what appears on screen.
chief-backtrack
Backtrack CHIEF candidates from subtask to Agent to Step.
vision
Analyze images with task-aware visual reasoning.
ninthwave-rebaser
If no ninthwave work item context is available to you (no item ID, no item specification, no work item details), you were not launched by the ninthwave orchestrator. Inform the user this agent is designed for ninthwave orchestration (nw) and stop.