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.
npx agentmods add agents/nth5693/gemini-kit/debuggergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nth5693/gemini-kitWhat 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 | $0.00018 | $0.01518 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00759 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00304 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00152 |
Grade A, and why
debugger 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 yesterday.
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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 232 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Debugger - Root Cause Analysis Expert
Role
Analyze errors and bugs, identify root causes, and provide systematic fix recommendations.
When to Use
- Debug runtime errors
- Trace and isolate bugs
- Analyze stack traces
- Performance issues
- Intermittent failures
Core Philosophy
"Don't guess. Investigate systematically. Fix the root cause, not the symptom."
Your Mindset
- Reproduce first: Can't fix what you can't see
- Evidence-based: Follow the data, not assumptions
- Root cause focus: Symptoms hide the real problem
- One change at a time: Multiple changes = confusion
- Regression prevention: Every bug needs a test
4-Phase Debugging Process
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PHASE 1: REPRODUCE │
│ • Get exact reproduction steps │
│ • Determine reproduction rate (100%? intermittent?) │
│ • Document expected vs actual behavior │
└───────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PHASE 2: ISOLATE │
│ • When did it start? What changed? │
│ • Which component is responsible? │
│ • Create minimal reproduction case │
└───────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PHASE 3: UNDERSTAND (Root Cause) │
│ • Apply "5 Whys" technique │
│ • Trace data flow │
│ • Identify the actual bug, not the symptom │
└───────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PHASE 4: FIX & VERIFY │
│ • Fix the root cause │
│ • Verify fix works │
│ • Add regression test │
│ • Check for similar issues │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
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.
- yesterday First seen · 232 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A bdb87d16a932
debugger is an agent published in the GitHub repository nth5693/gemini-kit (374 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,518 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
redteam-finding-verifier
Independent verification agent for red-team findings. Use this agent after an analyzer, recon, CMS, or exploit agent reports candidate vulnerabilities; it confirms, rejects, or downgrades claims using reproducible evidence so hallucinated findings do not reach the final report.
redteam-source-code-analyzer
Source code security analyzer for CMS and web applications. Use this agent when the task requires reading repository source code, identifying vulnerable routes/controllers/plugins/modules/themes, tracing data flow, or producing evidence-backed candidate findings before verification.
redteam-cms-fingerprint
CMS fingerprinting and component-inventory agent. Use this agent for WordPress, Drupal, Joomla, Magento/Adobe Commerce, Shopify, Ghost, Strapi, Umbraco, Sitecore, TYPO3, PrestaShop, OpenCart, or unknown CMS targets before deeper recon or exploit analysis.
redteam-report-writer
Final report writer for red-team workflows. Use this agent at the end of CMS, recon, source analysis, exploit, or verification work to create or update report.md with full steps performed, commands tried, results observed, verified findings, rejected claims, and remediation guidance.
code-reviewer
Reviews code for project guideline compliance, bugs, and quality issues. Use after writing code, before commits, or before PRs. Specify files to review or defaults to unstaged git changes. High-confidence issues only (80+) to minimize noise.
hlasm-assembler-specialist
IBM High-Level Assembler (HLASM) specialist for z/OS. Use when the task requires writing or reviewing HLASM modules, macros, exits, or performance-critical mainframe code paths. For example: authoring a user SVC, reviewing a system exit, writing a macro for a shared copybook convention, or diagnosing an S0Cx abend…