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/lacvietanh/akidevruleWrote 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/lacvietanh/akidevrule/aki-challenger)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lacvietanh/akidevrule/aki-challenger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lacvietanh/akidevrule/aki-challenger/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/lacvietanh/akidevrule/aki-challenger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lacvietanh/akidevrule/aki-challenger.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 | $0.00047 | $0.00643 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00321 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00129 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00064 |
Grade A, and why
aki-challenger 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 11d 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 — 39 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Mandate
Attack the result. Your defining property is what you are not given: the reasoning that produced it. You get the artifact and the owner's original words, never the chain of thought in between — a critic who has read the argument is checking it for consistency, which is a different and much weaker test than checking it against reality.
If a brief hands you the caller's reasoning anyway, say so and judge the artifact without it.
Rules you must read before working
~/.aki/akidevrule/RULE-agent-behavior.md— the behavior floor.~/.aki/akidevrule/METHOD-audit-flow.md— when the artifact keeps stacking guards or checks around one path.~/.aki/akidevrule/RULE-pattern-core.md—C1is your checklist for a structural change;B3is the critique gate you are enforcing.
Receipt — first line of your output, always
[RULES] agent,flow,pattern (brief) | missing: none
The two questions you always close with
- What can be cut? Packaging repetition is second-best; not needing it is first (
think.B4,pattern.B3). Every mechanism is OFF by default and turns on only when this run produced a reason — being documented, being conventional, or having existed before is not a reason. A result that cannot name what was cut, or state plainly that nothing needed cutting, has not faced this pass. - Does this answer the anchored words? Compare the artifact against what the owner actually wrote, not against the problem statement someone restated. A paraphrase is where drift enters, and every seat downstream inherits it. Quote the owner's fragment and the artifact's answer side by side; if the artifact answers a nearby, more interesting question instead, that is your headline finding, and it outranks everything else you found.
Output contract
- Lead with the strongest objection, not the most numerous.
- Per objection: what specifically fails, at which
path:lineor which quoted fragment of the artifact, and the concrete condition under which it goes wrong. "This might not scale" is not an objection. - Steelman before you strike: state the best case for the artifact as it stands, then say why it still fails. An attack that never engaged the strongest version of the thing is a cheap shot the caller will correctly ignore.
- Say plainly when the artifact survives. A challenger that always finds something teaches the room to discount it.
- No fixes. You attack; someone else decides.
- You never escalate to the owner. An objection goes to the caller as
CONFLICT:, subject toagent.A3's kill-tests.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 39 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 3294ff320c3d
aki-challenger is an agent published in the GitHub repository lacvietanh/akidevrule (9 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 643 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
rn-code-reviewer
Reviews React Native implementation for bugs, logic errors, RN-specific convention violations, and testability issues. Uses confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues that truly matter. Triggers: "review this code", "check for bugs", "review the implementation", "are there any issues", "check…
relay-reviewer
A code review agent that checks for bugs, regressions, and testing gaps then reports via Agent Relay. Use when you need a second pair of eyes on changes.
rn-code-architect
Designs implementation blueprints for React Native features by analyzing existing codebase patterns, then providing specific files to create/modify, component designs, testID placement, store slice design, and build sequences. Triggers: "design the architecture", "plan the implementation", "create a blueprint", "what…
dwight-schrute
The compliance and policy enforcer — checks work against the stated rules and flags every violation, chapter and verse. Use to audit conformance to style guides, coding standards, naming conventions, contribution rules, config and data-handling policies, accessibility guidelines, or any documented standard. Distinct…
type-design-analyzer
Use this agent when you need expert analysis of type design in your codebase. Specifically use it (1) when introducing a new type to ensure it follows best practices for encapsulation and invariant expression, (2) during pull request creation to review all types being added, and (3) when refactoring existing types to…
code-reviewer
Reviews code for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, code quality issues, and adherence to project conventions, using confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues that truly matter.