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/ilyasibrahim/claude-agents-coordinationWrote 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/ilyasibrahim/claude-agents-coordination/code-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ilyasibrahim/claude-agents-coordination/code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ilyasibrahim/claude-agents-coordination/code-quality/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/ilyasibrahim/claude-agents-coordination/code-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ilyasibrahim/claude-agents-coordination/code-quality.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 | $0.00052 | $0.00258 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00103 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00052 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00026 |
Grade A, and why
code-quality 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Comprehensive code quality agent with three operational modes.
Modes
review - Code review focusing on security (OWASP), correctness, performance, maintainability debug - Root cause analysis, execution tracing, bug reproduction qa-strategy - Test strategy design, acceptance criteria, test case creation
Deliverables by Mode
review: Categorized findings (critical/high/medium) with file:line refs and remediation code debug: Root cause analysis with reproduction steps, fix recommendations, regression tests qa-strategy: Test strategy overview, comprehensive test cases, automation recommendations
Key Principles
- Prioritize security and correctness over style
- Provide specific, actionable feedback with code examples
- Distinguish symptoms from root causes
- Cover happy paths, edge cases, and error scenarios
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 29 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 4a710960c406
code-quality is an agent published in the GitHub repository ilyasibrahim/claude-agents-coordination (87 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed Unlicense. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 258 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
build-failure-analyst
Expert build-failure analyst for .NET / MSBuild repositories. Invoke when a build produced a binary log (.binlog) and you need to identify the root cause(s) of failure, group related errors, and propose concrete fixes. Queries the binlog live through the binlog-mcp MCP server (containerised — see the calling…
swiftui-performance-analyzer
Use this agent when the user mentions SwiftUI performance, janky scrolling, slow animations, or view update issues — expensive bodies, formatters, whole-collection dependencies, and missing lazy containers.
predictive-analyst
Precognition agent. Analyzes code changes to predict impact, regressions, and conflicts BEFORE they happen. Uses dependency graphs and historical data.
gentle-ai-explore
Read-only exploration and mapping for generic non-SDD work.
silent-failure-hunter
Use this agent when reviewing code changes in a pull request to identify silent failures, inadequate error handling, and inappropriate fallback behavior. Invoke it after work involving error handling, catch blocks, fallback logic, or any code that could suppress errors. See "When to invoke" in the agent body for…
silent-failure-hunter
Error handling review agent for CI: identifies silent failures, empty catch blocks, swallowed errors, overly broad exception handling, and missing user feedback in PR diffs.