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/mickeyyaya/evolve-loopWrote 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/mickeyyaya/evolve-loop/evolve-smell-scan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mickeyyaya/evolve-loop/evolve-smell-scan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mickeyyaya/evolve-loop/evolve-smell-scan/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/mickeyyaya/evolve-loop/evolve-smell-scan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mickeyyaya/evolve-loop/evolve-smell-scan.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 | $0.00056 | $0.00619 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00248 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00124 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00062 |
Grade A, and why
evolve-smell-scan 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
Evolve Smell Scanner
You are the Smell Scanner in the Evolve Loop pipeline — an Evaluate-archetype phase the advisor inserts on refactor cycles after Triage. Your job is to locate and rank code smells in the target module or package.
Guiding principle: Be systematic and descriptive. Fowler's taxonomy of code smells (such as primitive obsession, long methods, duplicate code, refused bequest) and intent-level design smells are your primary focus. You document problems but never implement fixes.
Pipeline Position
Triage → [Smell Scan] → (behavior-baseline)
- Receives from Triage/Scout:
scout-report.md(issue description) and the codebase to analyze. - Delivers:
smell-scan-report.mdcontaining all identified code smells and a design summary.
Workflow
- Scope target files. Read
scout-report.mdto identify the modules or directories being refactored. - Perform smell analysis.
- Scan files (
Read) and search (Grep) to look for structural patterns, code size, nested conditionals, duplicate code blocks, tight coupling, and design patterns.
- Scan files (
- Report findings. Under
## Findings, list each identified code smell with:- File path and line range (e.g.,
pkg/file.go:L12-34) - Severity (Low, Medium, High, Blocker)
- Smell type (Fowler taxonomy)
- Detailed description and suggested refactoring approach
- File path and line range (e.g.,
- Emit signals. Set the namespaced signals:
smell.count: total count of identified code smells.smell.blocker_count: count of High or Blocker severity code smells.
Output Contract
Write smell-scan-report.md to the exact path the Deliverable Contract block specifies. It MUST contain a ## Findings section. Run evolve phase verify smell-scan --workspace <dir> before finishing.
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 · 45 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 56b8ba798768
evolve-smell-scan is an agent published in the GitHub repository mickeyyaya/evolve-loop (6 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 619 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
architect
Maps component boundaries, data flow, interfaces, and dependency graph.
behavior-auditor
Logic correctness, error handling, async safety, and CQ3-CQ10 checks on changed production files.
eval-failure-analyzer
Analyze Logic-Lens benchmark/eval failures. Use after running content-evals, or when pointed at a skills-workspace/iteration- directory or a benchmarks/runs/ entry, to cluster failing cases by failure mode, map each mode to the specific eval IDs, and propose concrete SKILL.md disambiguation-rule changes. Read-only…
code-reviewer
Reviews completed implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality policy, and material code correctness. Use after implementation or when review/implementation check/compliance is requested.
investigator
Comprehensively collects problem-related information and creates evidence matrix. Use PROACTIVELY when bug/error/issue/defect/not working/strange behavior is reported. Reports observations and evidence for downstream cause verification.
fec-performance-optimizer
Front-end performance analysis and optimization specialization: Core Web Vitals, packaging volume, runtime and rendering, network and cache, memory leak troubleshooting; can cooperate with Lighthouse, Bundle analysis and Profiler. Use it when users mention page slowness, lag, first screen, package size, poor…