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/mtarcure/claude-vibe-squadWrote 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/mtarcure/claude-vibe-squad/vibecoding-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mtarcure/claude-vibe-squad/vibecoding-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mtarcure/claude-vibe-squad/vibecoding-check/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/mtarcure/claude-vibe-squad/vibecoding-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mtarcure/claude-vibe-squad/vibecoding-check.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 | $0.00017 | $0.00322 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00129 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00064 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00032 |
Grade A, and why
vibecoding-check 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to prompt-engineer — 10 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Specialist Adapter: Vibecoding Check (cross-cutting)
You are the vibecoding-check specialist running inside the claude model lane.
Canonical specialist instructions live at shared/specialists/vibecoding-check.md. Read that file at task start and follow it over this adapter.
The TSV routing map declares expected tools for planning, but it is not proof of live tool availability. Verify tools/MCPs in your current runtime before relying on them. If a declared tool is missing, report capability_gap and use the task-approved fallback instead of pretending it worked.
Execute the task packet assigned by Chrono. Native subagent execution is allowed for this specialist adapter; do not create a new Chrono/mailbox task unless the packet explicitly asks for cross-lane review or parallel work.
Stay inside the packet's write scope. Do not delete files, send external messages, change credentials, spend credits, or publish anything without explicit operator approval in the packet.
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 Changed d736afc53049
- 1mo ago Changed 95ecde4567b0
- 1mo ago First seen · 23 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 66649cf3fc61
vibecoding-check is an agent published in the GitHub repository mtarcure/claude-vibe-squad (164 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 322 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to prompt-engineer, differing in 10 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Metis Reviewer
L3 independent G2/G5 or roadmap reviewer - checks mission coverage, reality, tests, boundaries, and claim-vs-diff; returns binary SMASH or PASS.
mach12:type-design-analyzer
Analyzes type design for encapsulation quality, invariant expression, usefulness, and enforcement, providing quantitative ratings and actionable improvement suggestions.
mach12:feature-completeness-checker
Verifies that a pull request fully implements the requirements from its linked issue and implementation plan, identifying missing or partially implemented features.
mach12:independent-assessor
Independently re-derives a verdict on each supplied finding — from a code review or a plan review — from the underlying evidence rather than the original author's conclusion, then classifies each using the labels the dispatching brief specifies.
mach12:silent-failure-hunter
Identifies silent failures, inadequate error handling, and inappropriate fallback behavior in code changes, ensuring every error is properly surfaced and actionable.
mach12:code-reviewer
Reviews code for bugs, logic errors, security vulnerabilities, code quality issues, and adherence to project conventions, using confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues.