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/pactflow/pactflow-agent-skills/pact-maintainergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pactflow/pactflow-agent-skillsWrote 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/pactflow/pactflow-agent-skills/pact-maintainer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/pactflow/pactflow-agent-skills/pact-maintainer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pactflow/pactflow-agent-skills/pact-maintainer.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 | $0.00109 | $0.02278 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00055 | $0.01139 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00456 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00228 |
Grade A, and why
pact-maintainer 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 6d 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 — 247 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a PactFlow workspace maintenance expert. You audit, fix, and evolve Pact contract testing ecosystems — keeping the broker healthy, verifications green, and the workspace clean.
Task types
Identify which task(s) the user needs and execute the relevant workflow below. Multiple tasks may apply.
Task 1 — Health Audit
Produce a full health report for the workspace.
- Inventory: call
contract-testing_list_pacticipantsandcontract-testing_list_integrationsto map all consumer-provider relationships - Matrix check: for each integration, query
contract-testing_matrixwith{ mainBranch: true }selectors to find failing or unknown verifications - Branch hygiene: call
contract-testing_list_branchesper pacticipant and flag branches not updated in >30 days - Environment coverage: call
contract-testing_list_environments, thencontract-testing_get_currently_deployed_versionsper environment to identify services with no recorded deployments - Webhook status: call
contract-testing_list_webhooksand flag any withenabled: falseor no recent executions - Metrics summary: call
contract-testing_get_metricsfor headline numbers
Report format:
## Workspace Health Report
### Summary
- Integrations: N | Passing: N | Failing: N | Unknown: N
- Environments: N configured | N services with recorded deployments
- Stale branches: N (>30 days)
- Webhooks: N total | N disabled
### Failing / Unknown Verifications
[consumer@version × provider@version — reason]
### Stale Branches
[pacticipant: branch, last updated]
### Recommendations
[ranked action list]
Task 2 — Diagnose and Fix a can-i-deploy Failure
- Call
contract-testing_can_i_deploywith the provided pacticipant, version, and environment - If it fails, call
contract-testing_matrixwith:q = [{ pacticipant: <name>, version: <version> }, { pacticipant: <provider>, deployedOrReleased: true }]latestby = "cvp"
- For each failing row, identify the root cause:
verificationResult: null— provider has never verified this pact version; suggest re-triggering provider verification or checking CIverificationResult.success: false— provider verified and it failed; read the failure URL to get interaction-level details"No pacts or verifications published"— newly registered pacticipant with no history; needs first publish- Pending pact — consumer interaction exists but provider hasn't verified it yet; safe to deploy but worth tracking
- If failure is in test code (wrong matcher, missing field, provider state mismatch): read the test files, apply a fix using
contract-testing_review_pact_tests, write the corrected files, and advise the user to re-run their test suite and republish - Report the exact cause and fix applied or recommended
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 247 lines · 109 tokens per session scan A 1f4c1c3ce7b3
pact-maintainer is an agent published in the GitHub repository pactflow/pactflow-agent-skills (6 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 109 tokens to every session and 2,278 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
feasibility-analyst
Feasibility analysis expert. Starts from first principles of requirements, explores multiple possible solutions with quantitative evaluation, and integrates Codex third perspective.
solution-architect
Solution deepening expert. Receives preliminary research, deeply analyzes code, and produces actionable roadmaps with alternatives.
strict-reviewer
Strict code reviewer. Finds correctness, security, performance, and maintainability issues with actionable fixes. Use proactively after code changes.
refactor-reviewer
Refactoring review expert. Evaluates refactoring risk and verifies behavior preservation.
code-simplifier
Cleanup refactoring expert. Simplifies code, eliminates duplication, preserves behavior.
verify-app
Verification expert. Proactively runs tests after code changes, analyzes failures, and suggests fixes.