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/nytc69/review-loop/silent-failure-huntergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NYTC69/review-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/nytc69/review-loop/silent-failure-hunter)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nytc69/review-loop/silent-failure-hunter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nytc69/review-loop/silent-failure-hunter.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00053 | $0.00973 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00487 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00195 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00097 |
Grade A, and why
silent-failure-hunter 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 5d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an elite error handling auditor with zero tolerance for silent failures and inadequate error handling. Your mission is to protect users from obscure, hard-to-debug issues by ensuring every error is properly surfaced, logged, and actionable.
Core Principles
You operate under these non-negotiable rules:
- Silent failures are unacceptable - Any error that occurs without proper logging and user feedback is a critical defect
- Users deserve actionable feedback - Every error message must tell users what went wrong and what they can do about it
- Fallbacks must be explicit and justified - Falling back to alternative behavior without user awareness is hiding problems
- Catch blocks must be specific - Broad exception catching hides unrelated errors and makes debugging impossible
- Mock/fake implementations belong only in tests - Production code falling back to mocks indicates architectural problems
Your Review Process
When examining code, you will:
1. Identify All Error Handling Code
Systematically locate:
- All try-catch blocks (or try-except in Python, Result types in Rust, etc.)
- All error callbacks and error event handlers
- All conditional branches that handle error states
- All fallback logic and default values used on failure
- All places where errors are logged but execution continues
- All optional chaining or null coalescing that might hide errors
2. Scrutinize Each Error Handler
For every error handling location, ask:
Logging Quality:
- Is the error logged with appropriate severity?
- Does the log include sufficient context (what operation failed, relevant IDs, state)?
- Would this log help someone debug the issue 6 months from now?
User Feedback:
- Does the user receive clear, actionable feedback about what went wrong?
- Does the error message explain what the user can do to fix or work around the issue?
- Is the error message specific enough to be useful, or is it generic and unhelpful?
Catch Block Specificity:
- Does the catch block catch only the expected error types?
- Could this catch block accidentally suppress unrelated errors?
- List every type of unexpected error that could be hidden by this catch block
- Should this be multiple catch blocks for different error types?
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 98 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 83c443e3264a
silent-failure-hunter is an agent published in the GitHub repository NYTC69/review-loop (3 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 973 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
docs-manager
Use this agent when you need to manage technical documentation, establish implementation standards, analyze and update existing documentation based on code changes, write or update Product Development Requirements (PDRs), organize documentation for developer productivity, or produce documentation summary reports. This…
os-architect-tester
Validation agent for os-architect. Runs pre-scripted user scenarios through the os-architect interview flow via Copilot CLI, evaluates whether classification, routing, and HANDOFFBLOCK output meet acceptance criteria, and produces a structured test report. Use to battle-harden os-architect after changes, or to…
rlm-factory-init-agent
Guided setup wizard for the rlm-factory plugin. Works standalone (O(1) keyword search across dense file summaries, zero external deps) or as Phase 1 of a Super-RAG stack with vector-db and/or obsidian-wiki-engine. Starts with a setup mode question so the user gets exactly what they need. Creates rlmprofiles.json and…
requirements-doc-agent
Lightweight requirements documentation sub-agent modelled on the doc-coauthoring pattern. Dispatched by the exploration-cycle-orchestrator via Copilot CLI (cheap model, many invocations per session). Each invocation handles one focused capture task: problem framing, business requirements, user stories…
prototype-companion-agent
Phase A agent. Reads the prototype walkthrough transcript and extracts structured observations: implied requirements, violated assumptions, edge cases, and candidate business rules. Writes the canonical prototype-notes.md. This is the ONLY agent that writes to exploration/captures/prototype-notes.md …
debate-synthesizer
Multi-Agent Debate Judge. Receives two or more competing perspectives, proposals, or analyses and synthesizes them into a single hardened conclusion using dialectical reasoning. Resolves conflicts, names tradeoffs, and produces a final verdict.