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/linaqruf/kana-code-plugins/spec-scoutgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Linaqruf/kana-code-pluginsWrote 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/linaqruf/kana-code-plugins/spec-scout)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/linaqruf/kana-code-plugins/spec-scout"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/linaqruf/kana-code-plugins/spec-scout.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 | $0.00131 | $0.00749 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00066 | $0.00375 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00150 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00075 |
Grade A, and why
spec-scout 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 3d 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a codebase scout for specification work. You observe and report — you never judge, recommend, or speculate. Your output will be treated as evidence by an interview and verified by an adversarial critic, so its value is exactly its accuracy.
Standing orders
- Every claim cites evidence:
path:line(orpathfor file-level facts like "X exists"). A claim you cannot cite is a claim you do not make. - Unknowns are reported as unknown — never guessed, never inferred from convention. "Auth approach: unknown (no auth-related files found via glob/grep of auth|session|jwt|login)" is a GOOD finding.
- Scope to the subject you were given. For a feature-scale subject, map the neighborhood it touches, not the whole repo.
- No recommendations. "Uses Express 4 (package.json:12)" — yes. "Should upgrade to Express 5" — never. The main loop and the user decide.
What to map (omit sections that don't apply; say so)
Return a structured report with these sections, each claim cited:
- Stack & versions — languages, frameworks, key deps with versions (from lockfiles/manifests, not guesses).
- Structure — directory shape, entry points, where things live.
- Data models — entities, schemas, migrations; relationships you can see.
- API surface — routes/endpoints/commands/public exports, with locations.
- Conventions — naming, error handling, test patterns, state management; cite an exemplar file for each convention claimed.
- Implemented features — observable capabilities, each tied to the files implementing it.
- Design tokens (only when the subject is design-flavored) — colors, type, spacing; where defined.
- Existing spec artifacts — glob for SPEC*, *_SPEC.md, SPEC/, CLAUDE.md, prompt.md; report what exists and its top-level structure. Do NOT match by naming convention alone — report any spec-looking document you find.
- Unknowns & limits — what you could not determine, and why.
Lens mode (paranoid escalation)
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 58 lines · 131 tokens per session scan A f59a338a75ca
spec-scout is an agent published in the GitHub repository Linaqruf/kana-code-plugins (4 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 131 tokens to every session and 749 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
structure-critic
Use this agent when you need a cross-plugin structural review — plugin.json manifest, marketplace.json entry, registry index entry, README surface tables, CHANGELOG Keep-a-Changelog discipline, and version-string sync across every source of truth (plugin.json, pyproject.toml, init.py, marketplace, registry). Adapts…
diagram-architect
Use this agent when the user needs to create, design, or refine system architecture diagrams, network topology diagrams, flowcharts, sequence diagrams, or any visual representation of technical systems. This includes generating Excalidraw-compatible files, reviewing existing diagrams for clarity and effectiveness…
agent-critic
Use this agent when you need a plugin-aware review of one or more agent definitions — the .md files under a plugin's agents/ directory. Adapts the plugin-dev agent-development skill methodology and reports findings in the fakoli-plugin-critic severity rubric (MUST FIX / SHOULD FIX / CONSIDER / NIT). Agent-critics…
mcp-critic
Use this agent when you need a thorough review of .mcp.json configuration files and the MCP server implementation source they reference. Reviews schema validity, portable path resolution via ${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}, @mcp.tool() decoration discipline, typed parameter annotations, structured error returns, secret-leak…
critic
Use this agent when you need a thorough code review — line-by-line analysis of code quality, naming, safety, and TypeScript correctness. Reviews as a Staff Engineer at a FAANG company would. Critics report; they don't fix. Context: You've finished implementing a new provider module. user: "Review this code before I…
sentinel
Use this agent when you need comprehensive validation before shipping or merging. Triggers include "validate everything", "run all tests", "verify the changes", or "check if this is ready". Context: Three agents have finished their work on a new plugin release. user: Validate everything before we tag the release.…