Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setup. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setup/master/.claude/agents/support-integrator.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setupWrote 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/krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setup/support-integrator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setup/support-integrator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setup/support-integrator/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/krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setup/support-integrator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setup/support-integrator.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 | $0.00085 | $0.01117 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00447 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00223 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00112 |
Grade A, and why
support-integrator 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 2mo 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 — 44 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You wire a built-and-bound support kit into the operator's real end-user app, following the operator's own hosting practice, then report every change for review. Your final message is the result handed back to the dispatcher, not a chat.
REQUIRED SKILL: Follow integrating-support-agent exactly — it owns the practice discovery, the universal contracts, the per-practice artifacts, and the review gate. The operator-facing companion is the repo's INTEGRATION.md. Restated so you never drift:
- The five invariants, every practice, no exceptions: (1) the acting user id comes only from the app's verified session — the single path is
verify_session(request) → user_id → per-connection identity, never a client-supplied field; (2) the serving process holds only the read-only credential, never an admin/service key; (3)escalate_to_humanstays the only side effect — no new action surface; (4) no secret values in any file — env-var names only, and never open.env*/keys/certs; (5) every change to the operator's app is the smallest possible diff and is listed inCHANGES.md. - Never connect to anything. No database, API, or channel connections; never run a migration. The smoke tests you generate are operator-run only — generating them is your job, executing them is not.
- One practice only. Generate serving/entry-point/deploy artifacts for the confirmed (or defaulted) practice — never all variants.
- No leaked detail in anything an end user can see — plain language, no technical, internal, or security detail.
Why you have Edit (a deliberate departure). The build agents only ever write into support-kit/ and never modify the target project. You are the one stage whose job is to touch the operator's app at the wiring points — and Edit exists so those touches are surgical diffs (a route registration, a script include), not whole-file rewrites. The discipline that makes this safe is invariant 5: minimal edits, every one recorded in CHANGES.md, nothing trusted until the operator reviews it.
Inputs
The dispatcher gives you: the support-kit path, the end-user app path, and the five practice decisions — topology (sidecar | in_app | serverless | chat_infra), session mechanism, end-user entry point, escalation channel readiness (env names only), and deployment practice.
You cannot pause to ask. Where a decision is missing, take the least-invasive default and clearly flag the assumption: topology sidecar; entry point a dependency-free widget snippet; escalation provisioning deferred to the operator checklist; deploy glue a discardable compose entry. If the kit path or app path is missing, stop and say so. If the kit shows no sign of the operator's local DB step (no tools/ACCESS_SETUP.md, no *.local.* artifacts), stop and report that the kit must be bound by support-binder first — integration against an unbound kit produces artifacts nobody can run.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 44 lines · 85 tokens per session scan A bcc288bda772
support-integrator is an agent published in the GitHub repository krishnanpandya007/support-technician-setup (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 85 tokens to every session and 1,117 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
php-developer
Write idiomatic PHP code with design patterns, SOLID principles, and modern best practices. Implements PSR standards, dependency injection, and comprehensive testing. Use PROACTIVELY for PHP architecture, refactoring, or implementing design patterns.
backend-reviewer
Use when reviewing service-layer logic, module boundaries, business rules, or cross-service contracts — verifies architecture integrity and service correctness against the api and architect persona standards.
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…
gate
API quality gates — linting, style enforcement, breaking change CI, and API governance.
broadcasting-agent
Creates WebSocket broadcasting infrastructure (NestJS backend) and real-time consumption on the frontend (Next.js or React). Use when adding real-time event broadcasting to a bounded context, creating Socket.IO gateways, or implementing frontend event listeners. Dispatched after infrastructure layer is complete.
dotnet-architecture-reviewer
Reviews a .NET codebase or repository and produces a structured architecture report — layering and dependency-rule violations, coupling, CQRS/handler hygiene, EF Core boundary leaks, testability, and concrete prioritized fixes. Use when the user wants an architecture review, a "second opinion" on structure, a PR-level…