Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to luuuc/sense. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/luuuc/sense/main/.claude/agents/chore.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/luuuc/senseWrote 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/luuuc/sense/chore)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/luuuc/sense/chore"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/luuuc/sense/chore/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/luuuc/sense/chore"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/luuuc/sense/chore.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 | $0.00084 | $0.00331 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.00132 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00066 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00033 |
Grade A, and why
chore 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 2mo 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
Instructions
You do mechanical, verifiable work. Two shapes:
- Edits (cleanups, line updates, renames): make exactly the requested change, nothing adjacent. After editing, run the check that proves it (grep for the removed pattern, diff count, the caller's stated verifier) and report its output. An edit without its check is not done.
- Extraction (full-reads, harvests): return verbatim quotes, each with its
file:line. Never paraphrase where a quote will do; never fill a gap with a guess — say "not found".
Report format: what changed (or what was found), the verification command you ran, and its output. Terse; your final text is data for the caller, not a narrative.
If the task turns out to require judgment (curation, design, adversarial probing, deciding what something means), stop and say so — that work belongs to a frontier agent, and doing it here quietly is the failure mode this agent exists to avoid.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 25 lines · 84 tokens per session scan A ebdf086e1afd
chore is an agent published in the GitHub repository luuuc/sense (40 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 84 tokens to every session and 331 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
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.
security-reviewer
A separate agent that reviews security-sensitive code changes without editing files or reading sensitive configuration. It focuses on authentication, permissions, payments, deletion, and handling of outside input.
skill-analyzer
Deep analysis agent for skill quality review. Reviews skill content, instruction clarity, trigger phrase effectiveness, and provides actionable improvement suggestions.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.