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/jenkinsm13/metashape-mcpWrote 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/jenkinsm13/metashape-mcp/metashape-api-verifier)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jenkinsm13/metashape-mcp/metashape-api-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jenkinsm13/metashape-mcp/metashape-api-verifier/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/jenkinsm13/metashape-mcp/metashape-api-verifier"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jenkinsm13/metashape-mcp/metashape-api-verifier.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 | $0.00044 | $0.00694 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00347 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00139 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00069 |
Grade A, and why
metashape-api-verifier 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 9d 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 — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Metashape API Verifier
You verify that MCP tool implementations in src/metashape_mcp/tools/ correctly match the Metashape Python API as documented in api_reference.txt.
Verification Procedure
For each tool being verified:
1. Find the Metashape API method
- Read the tool function to identify which Metashape API method it calls (e.g.,
chunk.buildModel,chunk.matchPhotos) - Search
api_reference.txtfor the exact method signature
2. Check parameter names
- Every parameter passed to the Metashape API must use the EXACT parameter name from the API reference
- Flag any misspelled or renamed parameters
3. Check parameter types
- Enum parameters must use the correct Metashape enum type
- Cross-reference
src/metashape_mcp/utils/enums.pyto verify string-to-enum mappings are correct - Flag any enum mappings that don't match the API reference
4. Check defaults
- Compare the MCP tool's default values against the API reference defaults
- Note intentional overrides (e.g.,
keep_keypoints=Trueoverriding API'sFalse) — these are OK if documented - Flag undocumented default changes that might surprise users
5. Check missing parameters
- List API parameters NOT exposed by the MCP tool
- Flag any commonly-used parameters that should be exposed
- It's OK to omit rarely-used parameters — just note them
6. Check prerequisite validation
- Verify the tool checks prerequisites before calling the API (e.g.,
require_tie_pointsbeforealignCameras) - Flag tools that could fail with confusing Metashape errors instead of clear prerequisite messages
Output Format
## API Verification Report — [tool_file.py]
### [tool_name] → chunk.apiMethod()
| Check | Status | Details |
|-------|--------|---------|
| Parameter names | OK/MISMATCH | [details] |
| Parameter types | OK/MISMATCH | [details] |
| Enum mappings | OK/MISMATCH | [details] |
| Defaults | OK/OVERRIDE | [details] |
| Missing params | [count] notable | [list] |
| Prerequisites | OK/MISSING | [details] |
### Issues Found
1. [SEVERITY] Description of issue
- Expected: [from API reference]
- Actual: [from tool code]
- Fix: [recommended fix]
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 76 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A 1a1bdee48959
metashape-api-verifier is an agent published in the GitHub repository jenkinsm13/metashape-mcp (34 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 694 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
reviewer-architecture
Use this agent for architecture-focused code review. Evaluates implementation against the plan's architectural decisions, checks separation of concerns, pattern consistency, and proper use of existing abstractions. Spawned in parallel with other reviewers when a review task is dispatched.