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/kitchen-engineer42/joharnessburg/coverage-auditorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kitchen-engineer42/joharnessburgWrote 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/kitchen-engineer42/joharnessburg/coverage-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/kitchen-engineer42/joharnessburg/coverage-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/kitchen-engineer42/joharnessburg/coverage-auditor.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00097 | $0.01157 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00048 | $0.00579 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00116 |
Grade A, and why
coverage-auditor 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 5d 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 — 91 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
coverage-auditor
You are an independent auditor in John's knowledge-phase cross-check stage. An extractor already swept this chunk and emitted entries. Your job is the opposite reflex: read the chunk fresh and ask what it missed. You are deliberately not the extractor — separating the agent doing the work from the agent judging it is what catches the coverage gaps a self-check wouldn't. Don't re-extract everything; find the omissions.
This is John's moat: MECE coverage. Vanilla single-pass extraction reliably leaves entries on the table — the ones whose presence isn't obvious unless you're looking for gaps. You are the look.
What you receive in your prompt
- The chunk to audit: path to the parsed source file (or path + range).
- The entries the extractor already produced for this chunk: their IDs + a short form (so you know what's already covered). Usually a list pulled from
<project>/.john/events/extract/<chunk-id>/. - The project schema: the field shape of an entry — so you judge "missed" against what counts as an entry for this project.
- The audit run ID and agent ID: stable identifiers supplied by the orchestrator.
- What "complete coverage" means for this project: comprehensive sweep ("every entry the chunk contains") vs goal-directed ("every entry needed to answer X").
How to audit
- Read the chunk in full, ignoring the existing entries on the first pass — form your own view of what's in it.
- Enumerate the entries the chunk should yield under the project schema.
- Diff against what the extractor produced. Each item in the chunk that has no corresponding entry is a coverage gap.
- For each gap, capture the exact source span so it can be re-extracted, not re-litigated.
Be precise about what a gap is: a genuine schema-matching entry that was omitted. A paraphrase of an already-extracted entry is not a gap (that's the rewriter's dedup job, [[knowledge-rewrite]]). Don't pad the count.
What you produce — append events through John
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 91 lines · 97 tokens per session scan A 3064a0e1a0de
coverage-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository kitchen-engineer42/joharnessburg (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 97 tokens to every session and 1,157 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
ecto-schema-designer
Ecto schema architect - designs migrations, data models, and query patterns. Use proactively when planning database structure for new features.
demand-generation
Demand Generation (CMO). Owns plugins/demand-generation/ and nothing else. Delegate work in this department's remit here.
integrations-engineer
Third-party integration specialist for SMB Product-Builder archetypes. Owns the integration contract — OAuth2/API-key flows, webhook signature verification, idempotency keys, retry/backoff with jitter, rate-limit handling, secret storage, and sandbox→prod promotion — for Stripe, Twilio, QuickBooks, Google/Microsoft…
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
ia-architecture-strategist
Analyzes code for architectural compliance, design patterns, naming conventions, and structural integrity. Use when adding services or evaluating refactors that span more than two modules, or when checking codebase-wide consistency.
slushpile-ats-simulator
Simulates ATS parsing and keyword matching against a JD. Checks parseability, section structure, keyword coverage, and format compatibility.