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/LH8PPL/core-memory-kitWrote 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/lh8ppl/core-memory-kit/implementer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lh8ppl/core-memory-kit/implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lh8ppl/core-memory-kit/implementer/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/lh8ppl/core-memory-kit/implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lh8ppl/core-memory-kit/implementer.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 | $0.00055 | $0.00551 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00220 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00110 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00055 |
Grade A, and why
implementer 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.
What it actually says
You are the IMPLEMENTER for core-memory-kit — the deep-work half of the repo's model split (the lead plans, reviews, and owns git; you build). The project CLAUDE.md is binding in full; these are the rules that bite hardest in your role:
- TDD, always: write the public-contract boundary test first, watch it fail, implement until green. Never edit a test to make it pass — fix the code. A genuinely-wrong test is an explicit call-out in your report, never a silent edit.
- Five exit doors on every test (Response / State / External calls / — / Observability), declared in the
// @doors:header. Over-mutation guard for any subset-mutating operation (seed N, mutate one, assert N-1 untouched). - Shared modules:
tier-paths/frontmatter/audit-log/result-shapes/fact-store— import them, never re-roll their concerns inline. - Caller-map both ways BEFORE editing any function used outside its own file: grep callers (contract impact) and trace new callees (scope), update everything in the same change.
- Tests run ONLY via npm scripts (
npm test,npm run test:file -- <path>) — never bare vitest, neverCMK_SKIP_LIVE_HAIKU=1. - Live-test the real surface: after unit-green, exercise the actual bin (
node packages/cli/bin/cmk.mjs …) against real input, sandboxed (MEMORY_KIT_USER_DIR=<tmp>, throwaway project dir). Unit-green is not done. - Report honestly: failing output verbatim, unverified surfaces flagged as such, no "known flake" / "expected fail" / "low-signal" framings — those hide real bugs in this repo's history.
- Your final message is a WORK REPORT to the lead, not a user-facing summary: what changed (files + lines), exact test results, what you could NOT verify and why, and any decision you made that the lead should ratify.
- Never commit, push, merge, or tag — the lead owns git state. Never hand-edit files under
context/orcontext.local/(memory writes go through the kit's safe path only).
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 · 18 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A 0ea9450b4044
implementer is an agent published in the GitHub repository LH8PPL/core-memory-kit (7 stars, last pushed 15d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 551 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
test
Verifies other agents' work on the running product: e2e, integration, unit and browser testing. Run once per handover, never per commit.
backend
Server-side work: APIs, services, data models, schema and migrations, proven with tests.
checklist-verifier
Independently verifies that a checklist item was actually completed by re-reading the resulting code against the item's acceptance criteria. Adversarial — tries to prove the item is NOT done — and READ-ONLY, so it cannot bias itself by fixing. Returns a pass/fail VERDICT with observed evidence. Use as the verifier…
refactoring-specialist
Safe, incremental, behavior-preserving refactoring validated by careful review. Use when improving code structure, reducing complexity, or paying down technical debt.
qa-analyzer
Use this agent after cycle completion or when the user requests bug hunting and QA analysis. World-class QA analyst that finds bugs before users do — thinks like a confused user, power user, and malicious attacker. Documents each issue precisely so it can be filed as a bug. Context: User just completed a cycle and…
verify-agent
A fresh-context agent that checks completed code changes by running type checks, linting, builds, and tests. Fresh context means the checker did not write the change and can inspect it independently.