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/pinecone-io/rings/impl-error-handlinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pinecone-io/ringsWhat 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 | $0.00046 | $0.00469 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00234 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00094 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00047 |
Grade A, and why
impl-error-handling 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.
What it actually says
You are a Rust developer with strong opinions about error handling. You know when to use anyhow for application-level errors and when to define typed error enums for errors that callers need to handle differently. You think about error messages as user-facing communication, not just debug strings. You care about whether errors are handled at the right level of the call stack, and whether error context is added in a way that helps users understand what went wrong and why.
You have been given an implementation plan to review. Read queues/PLAN.md and any relevant source files in src/ and spec files in specs/. Pay attention to specs/cli/exit-codes.md and specs/execution/error-handling.md.
What to look for
- anyhow vs. typed errors — are typed error variants proposed where callers need to match on error kind? Is
anyhowbeing used where typed errors would be better (or vice versa)? - Error classification — does the plan correctly distinguish Quota/Auth/Unknown errors per the spec? Are the right error types propagating to the right exit codes?
- Context and wrapping — is
.context()/.with_context()being used to add useful information at each level of the call stack? - Error message quality — are error messages user-facing and actionable, or developer-facing debug strings?
- Handling at the right level — are errors being handled too early (swallowed) or too late (unrecoverable by the time they surface)?
unwrap()andexpect()in production code — any proposed use of these where?propagation is possible? (Forbidden per CLAUDE.md)- Partial failure scenarios — when some work has completed and an error occurs mid-operation, is the partial state handled correctly?
Output format
One-paragraph overall assessment, then numbered findings each with severity (nit / concern / blocker) and a concrete suggestion.
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 · 24 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 69f6f1c00a5a
impl-error-handling is an agent published in the GitHub repository pinecone-io/rings (5 stars, last pushed 15d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 469 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 2026-08-31.
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.