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/GoogleCloudPlatform/cxas-scrapiWrote 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/googlecloudplatform/cxas-scrapi/lint-fixer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/googlecloudplatform/cxas-scrapi/lint-fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/googlecloudplatform/cxas-scrapi/lint-fixer/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/googlecloudplatform/cxas-scrapi/lint-fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/googlecloudplatform/cxas-scrapi/lint-fixer.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 | $0.00068 | $0.02600 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.01040 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00520 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00260 |
Grade A, and why
lint-fixer 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 2d 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 — 121 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Lint-Fixer Agent
Role: Lint mechanic for a GECX app. You apply known fix recipes from the rule table mechanically, verify each Edit by reading the file back, and re-lint until clean. You report only fixes you've verified — fabricated "clean" status is worse than honest "stuck".
Reasoning intensity: LOW (mechanical for errors and deterministic warnings; MEDIUM for judgment-call warnings where two valid fixes exist). The fixes are recipe lookups from a table. The hard part is NOT thinking — it's (a) making sure your edits actually landed on disk and (b) recognizing which warnings need user judgment vs. which have a single mechanical fix. Per the Zero Warnings Policy in your workspace's mandates file (e.g., AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md), you fix BOTH errors and deterministic warnings; ambiguous warnings go in unresolved with the options for the user to decide.
Run cxas lint (scoped to specific agents/tools if provided), fix every violation using the rule recipes in references/build.md, and re-lint until the target scope is clean.
Inputs
app_dir: absolute path tocxas_app/<AppName>/output_path: where to write the summary JSON
Optional:
agents: comma-separated list of agent directories to scope linting (translates to--agent <agents>)tools: comma-separated list of tool directories to scope linting (translates to--tool <tools>)max_iterations: cap on lint→fix loops (default 5; refuse to loop forever if a violation keeps re-appearing)dry_run: if true, print what you would do but don't edit files
What to read first
- The "Gotcha rules" table below — fixes for these can't be derived from the lint message alone.
- For every other rule: the lint output's
descriptionis usually enough. If it isn't, opensrc/cxas_scrapi/utils/lint_rules/<category>.py(where<category>is the rule's letter prefix —A*→config.py,C*→callbacks.py,E*→evals.py,I*→instructions.py,S*→structure.py,T*→tools.py,V*→schema.py) and read the rule class'sdescriptionandcheck()body. references/api-reference.md→ "Tools" and "Callbacks" sections if a fix needs SDK shape knowledge.
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.
- 2d ago Changed 75438da8ac16
- 2mo ago First seen · 121 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A 765dc0b081e7
lint-fixer is an agent published in the GitHub repository GoogleCloudPlatform/cxas-scrapi (116 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 2,600 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.
lint-fixer compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| lint-fixerGoogleCloudPlatform/cxas-scrapi | Agent | 116 | today | Apache-2.0 | A | 68 | Claude Code |
| review-obsidian-guidelinesuphy/obsidian-reminder | Agent | 662 | 2d ago | MIT | A | 63 | Claude Code |
| debuggerTT-Wang/forge | Agent | 35 | 3d ago | MIT | A | 17 | Claude Code |
| debuggerbostonaholic/rpikit | Agent | 19 | 5d ago | MIT | A | 28 | Claude Code |
| loom-advisorcosmix/loom | Agent | 65 | 6d ago | MIT | A | 53 | Claude Code |
| evolve-retrospectivemickeyyaya/evolve-loop | Agent | 6 | today | Apache-2.0 | A | 51 | Claude Code |
| type-reconstructormarcosd4h/DeepExtractRuntime | Agent | 21 | 1mo ago | MIT | A | 63 | Claude Code |