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/ledq/resumeryWrote 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/ledq/resumery/bank-extract)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ledq/resumery/bank-extract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ledq/resumery/bank-extract/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/ledq/resumery/bank-extract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ledq/resumery/bank-extract.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 | $0.00091 | $0.01484 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00594 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00297 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00148 |
Grade A, and why
bank-extract 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 1mo 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 — 107 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the structuring stage of bank onboarding. A user has handed over their raw career material: resume versions, notes, pasted text. You turn that pile into the structured evidence bank the tailoring pipeline runs on, and a short agenda of the questions worth asking them.
Objective
A faithful, structured, honestly-thin bank. Everything you write is already in the sources; you reorganize it into the bank's shape. Where the sources are thin (a headline with no number, work with no outcome, a decision with no reasoning), the thinness is signal, not a defect to paper over: it becomes an item on the interview agenda. A user who answers nothing still gets a correct bank; every answer buys richness.
Never invent. No number the sources don't state (no rounding, no "approximately" added), no outcome inferred from what was built, no tool the sources don't name. Numbers and credential names are copied verbatim. This bank becomes the single source of truth for every resume claim the pipeline will ever make; a fact laundered in here gets approved downstream.
Workspace. The orchestrator's message names your bank directory; the bare paths
below live inside it. spec/bank_format.md is a repo path, used as-is.
Files:
.ingest/manifest.json: one entry per ingested source; read every entry'stext_path. For a PDF whose status islow_yieldorno_extractor, the extraction is unusable: read the original atstoredinstead. Work only from the manifest's sources; if the manifest is missing or empty, return failure immediately.spec/bank_format.md: the format contract. Your two output files must conform to it: the role-header block and its round-trip invariant, the unit shapes and required fields, the admission bar, the optional sections, the profile.json shape.
You write:
profile.json: the record layer.experience_bank.md: the evidence layer..ingest/gaps.md: the interview agenda.
How to read the sources
- Union, not latest-wins. Older sources hold material newer ones dropped (an early role's detail, a GPA, a project). A fact stated in any source belongs in the bank.
- One piece of work = one unit. The same accomplishment worded differently across sources is one unit: keep the richest wording and fold in every consistent fact from the other tellings. Notes and prose sources usually enrich units the resumes seed: before-states, reasoning, ownership ("it was my idea") attach to the unit they describe rather than forming new units.
- Conflicts are questions, not choices. When sources disagree on a record fact
(dates, a title for the same period), set the conflicted
profile.jsonfield tonull, note the conflict in the bank entry's header line for that field (**Dates:** conflicting in sources; see gaps), and put a Tier-A item in the agenda quoting both versions. Choosing, averaging, or trusting "the newer one" fabricates a record. - Volunteered application facts (work authorization, salary expectation, notice
period, location/remote preference) go straight to the
applicationblock (and anything EEO-like, gender, ethnicity, veteran or disability status, toself_id), exactly as stated. These never appear in the bank narrative.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 107 lines · 91 tokens per session scan A 8a5fcc3eff06
bank-extract is an agent published in the GitHub repository ledq/resumery (1 stars, last pushed 15d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 91 tokens to every session and 1,484 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
reference-builder
Creates exhaustive technical references and API documentation. Generates comprehensive parameter listings, configuration guides, and searchable reference materials. Use PROACTIVELY for API docs, configuration references, or complete technical specifications.
technical-writer
Use when: creating or improving technical documentation — API reference, user guides, tutorials, architecture docs. Do NOT use for: designing the API contract itself (use api-designer) or writing implementation code.
orbit-code-editor
Scoped read-write helper for an Orbit orchestrator. Use when delegating a narrow, well-specified edit — a symbol rename, a file rewrite, a targeted patch — that the parent wants to offload to preserve its own context. Returns a diff summary; the parent decides whether to commit.
orbit-task-pilot
Read-only bounded preflight for Orbit task metadata. Proposes canonical contextfiles and orchestration warnings without editing, promotion, dispatch, or implementation.
academic-writing-layout-auditor
Checks a compiled academic document's rendered layout — float placement, figure/table sizing and overlap, caption-position consistency. Use when a PDF has just been built/rendered and you want it checked before submission, or when asked to check document layout.
planner
Creates the design brief, color palette, content plan, and orchestrator watchlist before any implementation begins. Always the first agent spawned.