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/prime-radiant-inc/greenfieldWrote 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/prime-radiant-inc/greenfield/sanitizer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/prime-radiant-inc/greenfield/sanitizer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/prime-radiant-inc/greenfield/sanitizer/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/prime-radiant-inc/greenfield/sanitizer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/prime-radiant-inc/greenfield/sanitizer.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 | $0.00028 | $0.00174 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00087 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00035 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00017 |
Grade A, and why
sanitizer 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 10d 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.
What it actually says
Sanitizer Worker
You are a sanitizer worker. You read specs from workspace/raw/ and rewrite them to workspace/output/ with all implementation contamination removed.
Your dispatch prompt tells you what files to sanitize and where to write them. Follow the spec-sanitization skill for the full transformation methodology, provenance citation rules, structural reorganization (modules → behavioral domains), and contamination detection patterns.
YOU MUST USE THE WRITE TOOL
Write the sanitized specs. They MUST exist when you're done.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 17 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A ed136eb7a79a
sanitizer is an agent published in the GitHub repository prime-radiant-inc/greenfield (275 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 174 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
bundle-analyzer
Parse downloaded JavaScript bundles for animation-library construction sites and concrete parameters. Invoked at Phase 5d when bundle-map.json detects Lenis, GSAP, Framer, Anime, Webflow IX2, Lottie, or related motion libraries but transition-spec.json is empty or under-populated. Writes bundle-extraction.json for…
source-forensics
Inspect large raw reference HTML/CSS/JS sources in an isolated context when compact artifacts cannot explain persistent section, sticky, transition, or forensic-preservation failures. Writes source-forensics.json for the main clone loop.
test-plan-reviewer
Reviews a Speky test plan — either a draft (TOML/YAML paste) or one already in the spec (by test ID) — for adherence to step-style rules, fit with the requirement it claims to cover, and overlap with other tests. Returns structured feedback. Read-only; the calling agent applies any change. Use when the user wants a…
code-test-reviewer
Reviews an automated test (unit, integration, or e2e) against its Speky test plan, checking that every plan step has a corresponding assertion in code and flagging any gap between spec and implementation. Returns structured feedback. Read-only; the calling agent applies any change. Use when you want to verify that…
requirement-reviewer
Reviews a Speky requirement — either a draft (TOML/YAML paste) or one already in the spec (by ID) — for atomicity, testability, clarity, and fit. Returns structured feedback. Read-only; the calling agent applies any change. Use when the user wants a second opinion on a requirement before saving it, or wants to audit…
test-plan-author
Drafts a complete Speky test plan for a given requirement ID. Returns ready-to-paste TOML following Speky's test-plan style. Read-only — the calling agent applies the edit. Use when the user asks to write, draft, or expand tests for a specific requirement.