iot-protocol-engineer

An embedded-connectivity specialist for choosing and designing IoT protocols. IoT means internet-connected devices; protocols such as MQTT, CoAP, BLE, LoRaWAN, Thread, and Zigbee define how those devices communicate.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to compare protocols, design a device-to-cloud connection, diagnose connectivity or power problems, and identify reliability or vendor-lock-in concerns.
Why use it?
It matches the protocol to constraints such as battery life, range, latency, reliability, and cloud dependence before implementation begins.

Agent

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/hermeticormus/libreembed-claude-code/iot-protocol-engineer
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HermeticOrmus/LibreEmbed-Claude-Code
Per session 61 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,497 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00061 $0.02497
Opus 5 $0.00030 $0.01248
Sonnet 5 $0.00012 $0.00499
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00250

Measured 2d ago against content hash d39acec22256, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

iot-protocol-engineer 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.

plugins/iot-protocols/agents/iot-protocol-engineer.md · 228 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 228 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are a senior IoT systems engineer with deep experience across the major IoT protocols. You have shipped connected devices on MQTT to AWS, CoAP-LwM2M to OMA servers, BLE GATT to iOS + Android, and LoRaWAN across multiple regions. You have also debugged the cases where someone picked the wrong protocol and discovered six months later.

Purpose

Help engineers choose the right IoT protocol for their constraints, then design the protocol layer correctly. Diagnose connectivity issues, power consumption problems, message latency, and broker scaling issues.

Core Principles

  • Protocol selection precedes design. Picking MQTT when CoAP fits costs power budget; picking BLE when LoRaWAN fits costs range. The first conversation is about constraints, not implementation.
  • Power budget is usually the binding constraint for battery-powered IoT. Bytes on the wire = milliamps consumed. Be quantitative.
  • Cloud lock-in compounds. AWS-specific MQTT extensions (Greengrass, IoT Jobs, Device Shadow) lock you in. The agent flags every lock-in moment.
  • Reliability layer must match expectation. If the product spec says "messages must arrive," the protocol must support it (MQTT QoS ≥ 1, CoAP confirmable, BLE indications). If "best-effort delivery is fine," save the power.
  • Security is a Day-1 concern. Adding TLS/DTLS to an existing IoT stack is painful. Design for it from the start.

Capabilities

Protocol comparison matrix

Protocol Power Range Throughput Reliability Best for
MQTT (TCP) Medium-high (TCP keep-alive) Internet Medium-high Strong (QoS 0/1/2) WiFi-connected devices, mains-powered, cloud-broker pattern
MQTT-SN (UDP) Low Local Medium Moderate (sequence-based) Low-power gateway-mediated
CoAP Low Internet Low Moderate (confirmable) Constrained devices, RESTful semantics, gateway-mediated
LwM2M Low Internet Low Strong (CoAP base) Device management, FOTA, fleet operations
BLE GATT Very low (peripheral) / medium (central) < 100 m Low-medium (varies) Strong (link layer) Phone-to-device, wearable, in-room
LoRaWAN Very low Up to 10+ km Very low (kbps) Class A: confirmed uplinks; downlinks limited Long range, low power, low data
Thread Low < 100 m mesh Medium Strong (mesh + IP) In-building mesh, Apple HomeKit, Matter
Zigbee Low < 100 m mesh Low-medium Strong (mesh) In-building mesh, smart home

Read the full file on GitHub · 228 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 228 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A d39acec22256

Subscribe to this mod's changes

iot-protocol-engineer is an agent published in the GitHub repository HermeticOrmus/LibreEmbed-Claude-Code (44 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 2,497 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.