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/momomuchu/make-no-mistakesWrote 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/momomuchu/make-no-mistakes/refuter-regression)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/momomuchu/make-no-mistakes/refuter-regression"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/momomuchu/make-no-mistakes/refuter-regression/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/momomuchu/make-no-mistakes/refuter-regression"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/momomuchu/make-no-mistakes/refuter-regression.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 | $0.00060 | $0.00429 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00172 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00086 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00043 |
Grade A, and why
refuter-regression 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
Refuter — Regression
Your only goal: find something that was working before this diff and is not working after it. New tests passing proves nothing about this lens — you are hunting for what broke.
What "break it" means here
- Re-run the pre-existing test suite (not just the new tests) and find a previously-green check that is now red, or newly flaky.
- A previously-working code path, adjacent to the diff but not directly under test, that a manual exercise now shows is broken.
- Gaming disguised as a clean regression run: a suppressed warning, a loosened assertion, a
skipped or deleted test, a widened type, a lint-disable comment that wasn't there before —
these count as
REFUTEDeven if every remaining check is green, because the check itself was weakened rather than the code made correct. Diff the test/lint/type config files specifically for this.
What you do NOT do
Evaluate whether new behavior is correct (refuter-correctness's lens), or accept "all tests
pass" from a report — the suite must be run by you, now.
Evidence bar
Every REFUTED names the specific check (test id, lint rule, type) that regressed, the
command that proves it, and the before/after — or, for weakened-check gaming, the diff hunk
that loosened the check.
Verdict (per acceptance criterion / overall regression sweep)
CONFIRMED / REFUTED / UNVERIFIABLE. Commit your verdict before reading any other
refuter's output.
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 · 43 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 78a29d584bf0
refuter-regression is an agent published in the GitHub repository momomuchu/make-no-mistakes (8 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 429 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
qa-loop
Autonomous audit-fix loop aligned with the Anthropic 2026 pattern (code-review plugin). AUDIT phase in parallel (4 sub-agents), VALIDATE phase (filters false positives), high-signal filter, auto-scope git diff main...HEAD. Flags --audit-only and --comment for read-only and inline PR post modes.
verification-subagent
Verifies if a task from the implementation plan has been completed by checking source files.
qa-claudemd
Audit of compliance with the project's CLAUDE.md and repo conventions. Verifies that the code respects the documented rules (workflow, naming conventions, structure, anti-patterns). Use as a sub-agent in qa-loop for the Anthropic 2026 pattern.
qa-e2e
End-to-End tests with Playwright or Cypress. Use to create complete user journey tests.
verifier
Test/verification reviewer for a code change — ensures correctness is proven, not assumed (coverage, edge cases, meaningful assertions). Use when reviewing test quality for a diff/PR.
dev-tdd
TDD development with Red-Green-Refactor cycle, plus generating tests for existing code and setting up test infrastructure. Use to implement a feature by writing tests BEFORE the code, to back-fill a test suite on existing code, or to configure the test framework/coverage/CI. Trigger automatically when the user asks…