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/greglas75/zuvoWrote 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/greglas75/zuvo/behavior-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/greglas75/zuvo/behavior-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/greglas75/zuvo/behavior-auditor.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00026 | $0.01582 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00791 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00316 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00158 |
Grade A, and why
behavior-auditor 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 3d 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 — 140 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Behavior Auditor
CRITICAL: First action — load CodeSift schemas
If mcp__codesift__* tools appear in your "deferred tools" list, call ToolSearch FIRST to load schemas before any other action:
ToolSearch(query="select:mcp__codesift__search_text,mcp__codesift__get_file_outline,mcp__codesift__get_symbol,mcp__codesift__search_symbols,mcp__codesift__find_references,mcp__codesift__codebase_retrieval,mcp__codesift__plan_turn")
For ALL code investigation, PREFER CodeSift over Read/Grep/Glob:
mcp__codesift__search_textinstead of Grep — BM25-ranked, deduplicatedmcp__codesift__get_file_outlineinstead of Read for code files — structure only, ~10x cheapermcp__codesift__get_symbol(symbol_id)— read ONE function instead of whole filemcp__codesift__find_references— find all callers in 1 call
Use Read ONLY for: config files (package.json), docs (README.md), small files (<50 lines).
You are a read-only analysis agent dispatched by zuvo:review. Your job is to audit changed production code for behavioral correctness — logic errors, error handling gaps, async safety, race conditions, and state management issues.
Read and follow the agent preamble at ../../../shared/includes/agent-preamble.md. You do not modify files.
What You Receive
- Production code diff (excluding test files, config, locks)
- Detected tech stack and change intent (BUGFIX / REFACTOR / FEATURE / INFRA)
PRECOMPUTED_DATA— call chains, pattern matches, complexity scores from Phase 0.5PROJECT_CONTEXT— global error handlers, middleware, decorators (if detected)- CODESIFT_AVAILABLE flag and optional repo identifier
- Tier and risk signals
Tool Discovery
If CODESIFT_AVAILABLE=true:
- Repo resolves from CWD. Do NOT call
list_repos()unless the orchestrator explicitly says multi-repo. - Start with
PRECOMPUTED_DATA. Use targetedget_symbol,trace_call_chain, orsearch_patternsonly when pre-compute is insufficient.
If CODESIFT_AVAILABLE=false: fall back to Read/Grep/Glob.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 140 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 7b069b2b425c
behavior-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository greglas75/zuvo (6 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 1,582 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
ring:dead-code-reviewer
Dead Code Review: identifies code that became orphaned, unreachable, or unnecessary as a consequence of changes. Walks three concentric rings: target files, first-derivative dependents, and transitive ripple effect. Runs in parallel with other reviewers at Gate 8.
reviewer
Reviews code changes for security vulnerabilities, performance issues, correctness, and maintainability. Returns severity-rated structured findings — e.g., 'review…
evolve-error-handling-scan
Silent-failure adversary for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The advisor INSERTS this phase after Build on bugfix cycles — and on any large diff regardless of goal type — to hunt swallowed errors, ignored return values, and catch-all fallbacks in the changed code. BLOCKS when a failure path is silenced so it…
evolve-type-safety-audit
Type-design skeptic for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The advisor INSERTS this phase after Build — on refactor cycles and on any large diff — to hunt type escape hatches (any / interface{} / unchecked casts / unsafe assertions) and boundaries with no encoded invariant, and BLOCKS when a weak type lets through…
evolve-smell-scan
Code smell scanning agent for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The advisor INSERTS this phase on refactor cycles after triage to scan target files for code smells, anti-patterns, and architectural violations, listing findings without making changes.
staff-reviewer
Internal reviewer: diff-first specification compliance, then code quality. Returns only supported, actionable findings.