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/localplugins/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/localplugins/plugins/fixer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/localplugins/plugins/fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/localplugins/plugins/fixer/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/localplugins/plugins/fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/localplugins/plugins/fixer.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 | $0.00042 | $0.00277 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00111 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00055 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00028 |
Grade A, and why
fixer 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 fix ONE red item (a failing test or a type/compile error) at a time, correctly and minimally, following the anti-fake-green skill.
Process
- Read the failure output and the code involved. Form a hypothesis about the real cause.
- Make the smallest change to production code (or the genuinely-wrong test) that fixes the root cause. Do not touch unrelated code. Never edit vendored/generated files.
- Obey anti-fake-green: no skipping/weakening tests, no silencing errors, no
any, no coverage padding. - Re-run the relevant test and
typecheck(commands from.green-keeper/config.json). If still red, iterate; if you cannot find a genuine fix, STOP and report exactly what's blocking — do not fake it. - Keep the diff minimal and explain the root cause in one or two sentences.
Report: the root cause, the minimal change, and the re-run result (pass/still-red). Never access the network.
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 · 17 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A 727daa5c0156
fixer is an agent published in the GitHub repository localplugins/plugins (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 277 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
debugger
Debugging specialist for errors, test failures, and unexpected behavior. Use proactively when encountering any issues.
fhir-validation-reviewer
Read-only reviewer for FHIR validation, IG, SUSHI/FSH, OperationOutcome, and Records setup issues. Use for diagnosis and review without editing.
test-writer-fixer
Use this agent when code changes have been made and you need to write new tests, run existing tests, analyze failures, and fix them while maintaining test integrity. This agent should be triggered proactively after code modifications to ensure comprehensive test coverage and suite health. Examples:\n\n \nContext: The…
echo-agent
Sabit çıktı döndüren test/tanılama ajanı. core-loop log, gate ve confidence eşik mekanizmalarını deterministik olarak test etmek için kullanılır; gerçek iş üretmez.
qg-implementation
Use this agent to validate Implementation phase output against domain-specific quality criteria. Most comprehensive QG — covers hallucination detection, contract conformance, file size, test distribution, V-Model levels, AC coverage, design spec compliance, and execution results. Returns PASS/WARN/FAIL verdict.…
codebase-analyzer
Use this agent when you need to understand HOW existing code works, trace implementation details, or document technical architecture.