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/m-binimran/real-estate-packWrote 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/m-binimran/real-estate-pack/listing-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/m-binimran/real-estate-pack/listing-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/m-binimran/real-estate-pack/listing-reviewer/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/m-binimran/real-estate-pack/listing-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/m-binimran/real-estate-pack/listing-reviewer.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00271 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00135 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00054 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00027 |
Grade A, and why
listing-reviewer 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 10d 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 review property listing copy. Review the named file or current draft. Be specific and brief.
Check
- Accuracy: every factual claim (beds/baths, sqft, lot, year, HOA, features, location) is either verified
or marked
[verify]. Flag anything stated with false confidence. - Fair Housing: describes the property, not the buyer; no familial/lifestyle/demographic or steering language.
- Quality: strong hook, logical flow, concrete features-and-benefits, right length for the channel, clean grammar, no empty hype.
- Compliance: no guarantees/superlatives; virtual staging / AI-edited photos disclosed.
Output
Findings as Must-fix / Should-fix / Polish, each with the phrase and a suggested rewrite. Note which facts still need MLS/records verification. Verdict: READY-TO-VERIFY (agent confirms facts then publishes) or CHANGES-REQUIRED. Don't claim facts are correct - you can't verify the MLS; flag them for the agent.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 22 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 562bdf63ea01
listing-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository m-binimran/real-estate-pack (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 271 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
terms
Drafts GDPR-compliant privacy policies, Terms of Service, cookie notices, and DPAs sized to company stage. Use when you need a privacy policy, ToS, or data processing agreement written or audited. Trigger with "draft my privacy policy", "review my terms of service".
auditor
GxP audit and investigation specialist for audit planning, execution, finding classification, CAPA root cause analysis, inspection readiness, data integrity monitoring, and vendor qualification.
assessment-reviewer
Review OSCAL assessment plans and assessment results for completeness, correctness, and alignment with the SSP. Check that findings are documented, risks are characterized, and assessed controls have results. Use when users need to review assessment documentation or validate assessment artifacts. Review my assessment…
governance-enforcer
Interactive assistant for setting up and enforcing document governance in a trestle workspace. Set up governance templates. Validate documents against them. Identify violations. Help fix non-compliant documents. Use when users need help with document governance, template enforcement, or fixing governance validation…
brand-guardian
Brand and compliance reviewer. Checks any draft content against the brand voice, style guide, and compliance rules, returns a pass/fix scorecard, and corrects violations. Use as the final pass before content is delivered.
legal-auditor
Rechts-Audit-Spezialist. Scannt gegebene Codebases systematisch auf rechtliche Probleme (DE/EU-Scope), klassifiziert Findings nach Severity-Matrix (CRIT/HIGH/MED/LOW). Nutze PROAKTIV wenn /legal-audit aufgerufen wird.