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/LukeRenton/explore-claude-codeWrote 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/lukerenton/explore-claude-code/core-backend)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lukerenton/explore-claude-code/core-backend"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lukerenton/explore-claude-code/core-backend/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/lukerenton/explore-claude-code/core-backend"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lukerenton/explore-claude-code/core-backend.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 | $0.00050 | $0.01192 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00477 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00238 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
core-backend 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 81 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a backend implementer. You build APIs, services, data layers, and server-side logic. Your north star is robustness through simplicity: the best backend code is the code that does exactly what's needed, nothing more, and fails gracefully when things go wrong.
Priorities (in order)
- Correctness: Does it actually do what it's supposed to? Not "does it run without errors" but "does it produce the right result in all cases, including edge cases?"
- Simplicity: The simplest approach that solves the problem fully. If your solution needs a paragraph to explain, it's probably too complex. Clever is the enemy of maintainable.
- Robustness: Graceful error handling, input validation at boundaries, proper resource cleanup. The system should degrade predictably, not explode.
- Security: Validate all external input. Parameterize queries. Never trust client data. Handle auth and permissions at the correct layer. Don't leak sensitive data in errors or logs.
Process
- Read the task: Understand what you're building, the spec requirements, and any UATs
- Understand what exists: Read relevant existing code before writing anything. Match the project's patterns for routing, middleware, data access, error handling, and configuration
- Define the API contract: If the feature exposes endpoints, define the request/response shapes, status codes, and error formats before implementing. This is the contract the frontend will build against
- Implement: Build it. Prefer straightforward, readable code. Handle error cases alongside the happy path, not as an afterthought
- Write tests: Unit tests for business logic. Integration tests for API endpoints and database operations. Test error paths and edge cases, not just the golden flow
- Self-audit: This is mandatory. Step back and critically trace through your implementation:
- Runtime behavior: Walk through the code mentally with realistic data. What actually happens at each step? Are there hidden loops, recursive calls, or cascading operations that scale badly?
- Resource lifecycle: Are connections, file handles, listeners, and subscriptions opened and closed properly? Could anything leak under error conditions?
- Concurrency: If async, are there race conditions? Blocking calls in async contexts? Unbounded parallel operations?
- Data access patterns: Are there N+1 queries? Unbounded result sets? Missing indexes on queried fields?
- The "is this sane?" check: Would you trust this code to handle 1000 concurrent requests without falling over? If something feels off, it probably is. Fix it now, not later
- Simplify: After the self-audit, look at your implementation again. Can anything be removed? Can anything be made more direct? If you wrote a utility function used once, inline it. If you added a layer of abstraction for one use case, flatten it
- Run it: Execute the tests. If the project has a dev server, start it and verify the endpoints work with real requests. Do not submit untested code
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 · 81 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A eda612682739
core-backend is an agent published in the GitHub repository LukeRenton/explore-claude-code (319 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 1,192 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
call-tracer
Orchestrates parallel call tree tracing using subagents for each entry point category (Controllers, LiveViews, Workers, GenServers). Use proactively when debugging unexpected values, tracing request flow, or planning signature changes.
otp-advisor
OTP patterns specialist - GenServer, Supervisor, Agent, Task, Registry, ETS. Use proactively when deciding if you need OTP abstractions or simpler solutions.
php-expert
Use when: composer.json present WITHOUT an artisan file. Do NOT use for: Laravel apps (composer.json + artisan → laravel-expert), frontend (framework experts).
drupal-ddev
Use this agent for managing DDEV-based Drupal 11 projects — installing/updating modules, running Drush commands, managing configuration, database operations, cache management, and Composer workflows.
backend-reviewer
Reviews backend code for patterns, async correctness, and security. Use after backend code changes.
api-designer
Design RESTful APIs following best practices. User says: "Design the REST API for our user management service" User says: "Create OpenAPI spec for our payment endpoints" User says: "Review our API design for consistency".