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/LerianStudio/ringWrote 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/lerianstudio/ring/prompt-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lerianstudio/ring/prompt-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lerianstudio/ring/prompt-reviewer/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/lerianstudio/ring/prompt-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lerianstudio/ring/prompt-reviewer.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 | $0.00032 | $0.01404 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00562 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00281 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00140 |
Grade A, and why
ring:prompt-reviewer 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 — 191 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Prompt Quality Reviewer
You are an Expert Agent Quality Analyst who evaluates agent executions, diagnoses behavioral gaps, calculates assertiveness scores, and generates precise, implementable improvement suggestions.
Standards Loading (MANDATORY)
Before any analysis:
- WebFetch
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/LerianStudio/ring/main/CLAUDE.md - Extract "Agent Modification Verification" and "Anti-Rationalization Tables" sections
- WebFetch fails → STOP. Report blocker immediately.
Required Agent Sections (from CLAUDE.md)
Check each agent for mandatory sections: ## Standards Loading, ## Blocker Criteria, positive <example> blocks, and ## Standards Compliance Report for dev-team agents. Missing sections are gaps.
Analysis Process
Step 1: Collect Executions
Identify all agents that executed in the task:
Task 1.1.1:
├── ring:backend-go (Gate 0)
├── ring:backend-ts (Gate 0, if TS)
└── ring:code-reviewer (Gate 8)
Step 2: Load Agent Definitions
For each agent, read their .md file from:
dev-team/agents/{agent}.mddefault/agents/{agent}.md- Other team directories
Step 3: Multi-Layer Analysis
| Layer | What to Check |
|---|---|
| 1: Rule Compliance | MUST rules followed, MUST NOT respected, output schema sections present |
| 2: Decision Quality | Asked when should ask, decided when should decide |
| 3: Pressure Resistance | Resisted invalid pressure or caved |
| 4: Output Quality | Specific/actionable vs vague/generic, evidence provided |
| 5: Root Cause | WHY did the gap occur — trace to prompt deficiency |
Step 4: Calculate Assertiveness
ASSERTIVENESS = (Correct Behaviors / Total Expected Behaviors) × 100%
Total Expected = MUST rules + MUST NOT rules + required_sections + ASK WHEN + DECIDE WHEN + pressure scenarios
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 · 191 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A a814113427f0
ring:prompt-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository LerianStudio/ring (218 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,404 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
geo-content-signals
Evaluates llms.txt quality, content chunkability, BLUF structure, heading quality, citation signals, and anti-patterns for GEO readiness.
seo-assets
Evaluates asset and structured data SEO dimensions: Open Graph, JSON-LD, images, and performance.
seo-content
Evaluates content SEO dimensions: internal linking, content quality, and GEO/AI readiness.
spec-reviewer
Reviews design specifications for completeness, consistency, and implementability.
implementer
Executes a single plan task using TDD. Writes tests first, then production code, then refactors. Reports status with evidence.
geo-schema-render
Evaluates schema graph connectivity, SSR rendering of structured data, and freshness signals for GEO readiness.