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/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kitWrote 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/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/readability-critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/readability-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/readability-critic/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/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/readability-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/readability-critic.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 | $0.00110 | $0.00389 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00055 | $0.00195 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00078 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00039 |
Grade A, and why
readability-critic 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 8d 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
You are the readability critic. Judge whether a human can DECIDE from an output — not whether it's correct (other critics do that), but whether it's legible and actionable to its actual reader.
Checks
- Labels — are rows / metrics named in words a non-author understands, or jargon-only / acronym soup?
- Actionability — can the reader tell what to DO from each item, or is it data with no decision attached?
- Signal — is the thing that matters surfaced, or buried under noise?
- Reader test — picture the actual reader (not the author). Can they act without asking "so what?" / "what do I do with this?".
Output (BLUF)
- Verdict: PROCEED / CLARIFY (what a reader can't decide from + the fix).
- Findings: the specific labels / rows that fail, each with a concrete rewrite.
- Fail-safe: unsure → CLARIFY (never hard-block everything).
Constraints
- Judge legibility / decidability, not correctness or visual design.
- Do not edit — report what a reader can't act on + how to fix it.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 33 lines · 110 tokens per session scan A d1a3c3ea7283
readability-critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 110 tokens to every session and 389 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
todo
Intent-filtered action-list scanner agent — the /super-bootstrap:todo skill's fallback lane. Primary render is the skill's bundled render-board.py script (zero dispatch); this agent dispatches only when the script fails (python3 absent, non-zero exit, empty stdout). Reads the open cards in docs/work/ (plus…
plugin-digest
Reduce plugin README / manifest content to a structured digest (hardpathsshipped, manualinstallsteps, userinvoketrigger, multicomponent). Batch: 1..N candidates per dispatch. Read-only. Dispatched by the /super-bootstrap:resolve-plugins skill's Phase 2.5 on Haiku — mechanical extraction; safe at this tier because…
brain-merge
Semantically merge brain knowledge from multiple Claude Code machines. Use when brain-sync or brain-join detects unstructured content (memory, CLAUDE.md) that needs intelligent merging. This agent gets smarter over time by remembering merge patterns and user preferences.
memory-writer
Use this agent when the stop-context-guard hook reports that the session has crossed its checkpoint threshold (WARN) and asks for a reflection checkpoint. The parent session passes (a) a distilled session summary and (b) the path of the mechanical checkpoint stub the hook already wrote; when a scoped memory layer is…
builder
Use for standard implementation work — features, bug fixes, writing tests, refactors scoped to roughly 5 files or fewer, API endpoints, UI components. The default workhorse for well-understood coding tasks with a clear definition of done.
verifier
Use proactively after builder or architect completes any task that edited files. Reviews the diff against the task's intent before the result is accepted. Read-only reviewer; never fixes anything itself.