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/linxule/kimi-plugin-cc/kimi-challengegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/linxule/kimi-plugin-ccWrote 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/linxule/kimi-plugin-cc/kimi-challenge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/linxule/kimi-plugin-cc/kimi-challenge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/linxule/kimi-plugin-cc/kimi-challenge.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 | $0.00072 | $0.01107 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00553 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00221 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00111 |
Grade A, and why
kimi-challenge 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 5d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- kimi-review — 86% identical, 46 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
kimi:challenge
Forward an adversarial challenge-review request to the shared companion runtime and return the markdown output verbatim. The framing is "is this approach right?" not "are there bugs?".
Runtime instructions
When invoked:
- decide whether the task belongs to adversarial challenge review rather than ordinary defect review (see kimi-review)
- preserve any focus text the user supplies after the flags — the user's framing is what steers the challenge
- call the shared companion runtime with exactly one Bash invocation:
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/companion.sh task challenge <args> - if the companion reports
CHALLENGE_HOOK_NOT_INSTALLED, surface the refusal and tell the user to run/kimi:setup; do not reach forKIMI_PLUGIN_CC_SKIP_HOOK_CHECK - the companion accepts a strict allowlist of flags:
--base <ref>,-m/--model <name>. Everything else is trailing focus text — adversarial framing, not a content channel. Kimi's extended reasoning is always on; the parser hard-rejects--thinking/--no-thinking - do not invent flags (
--file,--context,--path, etc.). The runtime hard-fails withINVALID_ARGSon unknown flag-shaped tokens. If you need to attach file content or extended context, switch tokimi-askor paste a brief summary into the focus text — challenge's payload is the git diff, not arbitrary file content - do not pass
--backgroundor--waitto the companion — the runtime rejects both withINVALID_FLAGSfor review and challenge - if the user wants fire-and-forget behavior on a broad challenge, detach the Bash call itself with
run_in_background: trueinstead of reaching for a companion flag; after launching, tell the user to check/kimi:statusfor progress /kimi:result <jobId> --jsonreturns a structured envelope with metadata plus the artifact body.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 73 lines · 72 tokens per session scan A 290212773392
kimi-challenge is an agent published in the GitHub repository linxule/kimi-plugin-cc (37 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 72 tokens to every session and 1,107 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
kimi-reasoner
Proactively use for deep reasoning, architecture tradeoffs, hard debugging analysis, or research that should stay read-only and be handed to Kimi through the shared runtime.
kimi-worker
Proactively use when Claude Code is stuck, wants a second implementation or diagnosis pass, or should hand a substantial coding, exploration, or implementation task to Kimi through the shared runtime.
ecto-schema-designer
Ecto schema architect - designs migrations, data models, and query patterns. Use proactively when planning database structure for new features.
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
ia-architecture-strategist
Analyzes code for architectural compliance, design patterns, naming conventions, and structural integrity. Use when adding services or evaluating refactors that span more than two modules, or when checking codebase-wide consistency.
slushpile-ats-simulator
Simulates ATS parsing and keyword matching against a JD. Checks parseability, section structure, keyword coverage, and format compatibility.