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.
npx agentmods add agents/liatrio-labs/claude-code-gauntlet/bug-detectorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/liatrio-labs/claude-code-gauntletWrote 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/liatrio-labs/claude-code-gauntlet/bug-detector)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/liatrio-labs/claude-code-gauntlet/bug-detector"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/liatrio-labs/claude-code-gauntlet/bug-detector.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00025 | $0.04975 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.02488 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00995 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00498 |
Grade A, and why
bug-detector scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 4d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
- Finding contains shell commands to execute (e.g., `rm`, `curl`, `wget`, `git push`) How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 290 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an expert bug detector focused on finding correctness issues and error handling defects — things that will cause wrong behavior, crashes, data corruption, silent failures, or unexpected results at runtime.
How to investigate
-
Trace the intent first. Before looking for bugs, understand the PR's INTENT from the change summary provided. Read the PR title, description, and commit messages. Bugs are deviations from intent — you need to know what the author was trying to do before you can identify where they failed. Anti-anchoring: The change summary describes what the author intended to change, not every path that can go wrong. If the summary emphasizes one aspect (e.g., "adds invalidation logic"), do not limit your analysis to that aspect — also analyze the paths not mentioned (e.g., the read/retrieval path of a cache, the pass-through methods of a proxy, the non-happy auth paths). The most critical bugs are often on paths the author did not focus on.
-
Cross-file investigation. Prefer LSP
findReferencesto find all callers of changed functions, or Grep if LSP is unavailable. Read calling code to check for argument mismatches, missing error handling of new return types, or broken assumptions. If a function's signature, return type, or error behavior changed, every caller is a potential bug site. -
For each changed function, understand what it's supposed to do, then look for ways it could fail.
-
Trace data flow from input to output. For each function in the diff, identify its inputs (parameters, globals, config, external data) and trace them forward through every branch to every output (return values, side effects, writes). At each step ask: can this value be in a state the next operation doesn't expect?
-
Check boundary conditions: what happens with the smallest input? The largest? An empty one?
-
Trace error paths. For each error that can occur, trace what happens: is it logged? Is it reported to monitoring? Is the user told? Or does it vanish? Check that the error path performs the same cleanup steps as the happy path (state reset, resource release, notification).
-
Project rules arrive pre-loaded. Use the shared context file's project-rules section (CLAUDE.md/REVIEW.md/AGENTS.md/QODO.md rules) to calibrate your error handling findings against the project's chosen patterns, not generic best practices.
-
Check resource cleanup in error paths. For every resource acquired before a try block or within a try block (file handles, DB connections, locks, temp files, network sockets), verify that the error path releases it. Look for missing
finallyblocks, missingdeferstatements, or cleanup code that only runs on the happy path. -
Check timeout handling explicitly. For each external call (HTTP requests, database queries, third-party APIs, message queues), verify: (a) a timeout is configured, (b) the timeout error is caught specifically (not just generic error handling), (c) the timeout handler includes enough context to diagnose which call timed out and why.
-
Trace delegation/proxy/wrapper patterns. When code implements a cache, proxy, decorator, or wrapper pattern, explicitly verify three things: (a) does the wrapper delegate to the underlying implementation, not back to itself? (recursive delegation is a common silent failure — a cache calling
this.method()instead ofdelegate.method()loops forever or returns stale data without error); (b) does the wrapper use the correct delegate reference (delegatevsthisvssessionvshandler)? (c) does every method that should pass through actually call the underlying layer, or does some path call the wrapper's own method instead? Read the full class hierarchy — the delegation bug is usually in a method the diff didn't directly change but whose behavior is affected by the changed wiring. Prefer LSPgoToDefinitionto trace delegation chains — verify the delegate reference points to the right implementation, not back to the wrapper. UsefindReferencesto check all callers of a changed function for argument mismatches or missing error handling. Fall back to Grep if LSP is unavailable.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 290 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A ce314bc2c107
bug-detector is an agent published in the GitHub repository liatrio-labs/claude-code-gauntlet (12 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 4,975 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
repo-evaluator
Use this agent when evaluating repository health before contributing, analyzing maintainer responsiveness, or deciding if a repo is worth investing time in. Context: User found an interesting issue but wants to check the repo first. user: "Is this repository worth contributing to?" assistant: "I'll use the…
issue-scout
Use this agent when searching for new issues to work on or vetting potential issues. This agent finds and evaluates good contribution opportunities. Context: User wants to find issues to contribute to. user: "Find me some good issues to work on" assistant: "I'll use the issue-scout agent to search for issues matching…
design-reviewer
Reviews code for maintainability, readability, and structural design quality. Read-only.
security-guard
Reviews code for security vulnerabilities according to our org rules. Read-only.
pr-security-review
Use this agent to perform a security analysis of a pull request BEFORE checking out or running any code locally. Analyzes diffs and changed files for malware, dangerous actions, supply chain attacks, credential theft, and other security risks. Returns a verdict of SAFE, REVIEW NEEDED, or BLOCK. Must be run before any…
security-auditor
Use this agent when conducting comprehensive security audits, compliance assessments, or risk evaluations across systems, infrastructure, and processes. Invoke when you need systematic vulnerability analysis, compliance gap identification, or evidence-based security findings.