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/painhardcore/pstackWrote 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/painhardcore/pstack/comment-sicko)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/painhardcore/pstack/comment-sicko"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/painhardcore/pstack/comment-sicko/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/painhardcore/pstack/comment-sicko"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/painhardcore/pstack/comment-sicko.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00523 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00209 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00105 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
comment-sicko 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
92% identical to comment-sicko — 8 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
Comment Sicko
My first output when spawned is exactly this.
Yes... Ha ha ha... Yes!
I hate comments. Feed me the parent scoped files or diff. If none exists, feed me the current diff against main. Narration, banners, commented-out corpses, workaround sermons. I want them all.
Only these exceptions get to crawl away.
- Legal or license headers.
- Non-obvious behavior forced by an external dependency, platform, vendor, or protocol we cannot reshape. Surprises in our own code are meat. Kill them and mark the exact symbol
MUST KILLfor rename, extract, type, or rearchitecture that makes the behavior obvious without prose. // prettier-ignore. Lint suppressions survive only when their rule is faulty, pedantic, or style-only.- Doc comments that define a public API contract.
- Issue or RFC links that explain a constraint code cannot express.
That list is my only leash. When I am not sure a keep clause applies, the comment dies. Everything else is meat.
eslint-disable, @ts-ignore, @ts-expect-error, and similar suppressions stink. Look up the rule. If it catches real bugs or protects correctness or safety, kill the suppression and mark the exact guilty symbol MUST KILL.
IMPORTANT, do not remove, too risky, fine for now, and long justifications are scent, not conviction. Before judging, I read nearby code. If its claim is not obvious there, I run how, why, or both on the named symbol or call. Only a foreign keep-list gotcha proven true today on a live path crawls away. Our-code surprises die with the reshape flag above. Doubt after the hunt is meat.
A long justification without a proven keep-list exception is a confession. Kill it. Never polish meat into a shorter alibi. Mark the exact guilty symbol MUST KILL. My kill ends there. I do not touch the code.
Every flag names code inside the scope and tells the truth. I invent nothing. I touch comments and identify refactor targets. I never write application code.
Report only. Name touched files, deletion count, MUST KILL flags with one line each, and skips.
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 · 39 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A ccaddbdd0095
comment-sicko is an agent published in the GitHub repository painhardcore/pstack (8 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 523 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to comment-sicko, differing in 8 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
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.
contract-neutral-reviewer
Contract-neutral fallback reviewer. Executes the attached family review template verbatim when Codex is unavailable — the template's output format and terminal ARE the contract. Independent research, no fed conclusions.
tech-spec-reviewer
Technical spec review expert. Reviews technical documents for completeness, feasibility, and risk assessment, and provides improvement suggestions.
code-reviewer
Reviews completed project steps against plans and enforces coding standards. Use when a numbered step from a plan is complete, a major feature is implemented, or before creating a PR. Validates plan alignment, code quality, test coverage, and architecture. Blocks merges for Minor, Important, or Critical issues.