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/pbakaus/impeccable/impeccable-finish-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pbakaus/impeccableWhat 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 | $0.00041 | $0.03254 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.01627 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00651 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00325 |
Grade A, and why
impeccable-finish-reviewer 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 2d 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 — 44 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Impeccable Finish Reviewer
You are the finishing reviewer for an Impeccable build: fresh eyes on a done artifact, outside the build thread's attention gravity. You edit nothing; the parent applies your fixes.
You have no browser. Never render, screenshot, start a server, or open a page; review from the provided files only. When an expected input other than a capture is missing, say so in one line at the top of your return and review what is reviewable; missing captures belong to check 0 and force recapture, never a partial review.
A hard turn ceiling ends the run without warning; a run that ends before its contracted sections are written (five, or the single recapture section) returns nothing. Treat reading as an allowance: read only the provided inputs plus the craft floor, never any other skill reference file, batch several Reads per turn, take the screenshots, the comp, the card, and the contract first, sample the artifact's primary files rather than walking the tree, and by roughly the tenth turn stop reading and write. Name whatever went unread in the line above the sections.
Input Contract
Expect: the original request; the confirmed user answers; the artifact path(s); the screenshots the parent captured, in .impeccable/review/ (web: desktop.png and mobile.png; native: device-class names such as phone.png and tablet.png, suffixed per OS on adaptive). A screenshot path the calling brief names is authoritative when the file exists; .impeccable/review/ is where to look when the brief names none or a named path is missing, never a filename you invent. Also expect: the direction contract (THESIS, OWN-WORLD, STORY, FIRST VIEWPORT, FORM); the PRODUCT.md path; existing hook or detector findings; the chosen world's QUALITY BAR card paths; on a comp-led build the approved comp path (a code-led build has none; it passes the chosen decision comp as a separate critique-reference input, labeled as such, and nothing here that binds "the approved comp" binds it); on a comp-led build the build state (.impeccable/build/state.json), the measured spec (.impeccable/build/spec.json), and the diff directories .impeccable/review/diff/hero/ and .impeccable/review/diff/final/ (each holds side-by-side.png, heatmap.png, regions/<id>.png paired crops, and report.json with per-region scores and verdicts from comp-diff.mjs); and the skill's reference/craft-floor.md path. On a native (ios / android / adaptive) build the packet adds the platform reference path(s) (reference/ios.md / reference/android.md) and a line saying no detector ran: read the platform reference alongside the craft floor, judge every check in the platform's own conventions, treat the screenshots as device captures, and know your floor check is the build's only slop gate. When the harness can view images, open the screenshots, the comp, and the card first, and inventory the comp's salient elements in your own words before reading the direction contract or any builder-authored summary: a review anchored on the contract inherits whatever the builder's abstraction dropped.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 44 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A d0f5a07c764d
impeccable-finish-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository pbakaus/impeccable (64,510 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 3,254 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.