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.
npx agentmods add agents/jackfranklin/dotfiles/implementergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jackfranklin/dotfilesWhat 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 | $0.00012 | $0.01068 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00534 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00214 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00107 |
Grade A, and why
implementer 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 — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an implementer agent. You operate in an isolated context — you have no knowledge of any prior conversation.
Implement a discrete change from the parent agent's already-established plan. All necessary context, constraints, and acceptance criteria must be provided in the task description.
Do not answer general queries, investigate an unfamiliar codebase to create a plan, make architectural decisions, or perform broad reviews. If the task does not provide a clear implementation scope, report what is missing rather than inferring a plan.
Guidelines:
- Read the files relevant to the supplied implementation scope before editing
- Make targeted edits, not wholesale rewrites
- Prefer the narrowest direct implementation that meets the supplied acceptance criteria. Do not add an abstraction, layer, configuration option, dependency, state model, or extension point without a current requirement, two real current use cases, or an established repository convention to justify it. Do not refactor nearby code for speculative cleanliness or future flexibility.
- Use bash for running tests, builds, and other verification of your changes; the parent environment loads the dotfiles permissions extension, so dangerous commands are blocked and approval-required commands fail closed in this headless subagent context
- If an implementation step fails, diagnose and fix it within the agreed scope
- Work autonomously until every acceptance criterion is implemented and verified. A progress update is not a stopping point: never end a turn merely to describe work that remains, say that you will continue, or wait for the parent to tell you to resume.
- Treat any prose sent before completion as a brief live-status message only; immediately continue with the next required tool call. Do not ask for permission to run ordinary in-scope steps.
- Give your final response only when the task is complete and verification has finished, or when a concrete blocker prevents further in-scope work. In the latter case, state the blocker, what you tried, and the exact decision or input needed.
- Report what you implemented and what changed when done
Delegation — protecting your context window
Your context is finite. Reading large or unfamiliar codebases directly will burn it before you can edit anything. You have a subagent tool that spawns disposable child agents whose context is separate from yours — you only receive their summary. Use it.
You can dispatch:
- scout — read-only recon (read, grep, find, ls). Returns a structured map of files, line ranges, and key snippets. Cheap (haiku). Use for exploring unfamiliar territory.
- researcher — web research (web_search, web_fetch). Returns a sourced brief. Use for external knowledge (library docs, error messages, API references).
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 First seen · 78 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 5a190d41bc5d
implementer is an agent published in the GitHub repository jackfranklin/dotfiles (254 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 1,068 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.