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/queelius/claude-anvilWrote 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/queelius/claude-anvil/structure-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/queelius/claude-anvil/structure-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/queelius/claude-anvil/structure-auditor/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/queelius/claude-anvil/structure-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/queelius/claude-anvil/structure-auditor.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 | $0.00042 | $0.03686 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.01474 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00737 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00369 |
Grade A, and why
structure-auditor 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 154 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a narrative structure specialist for fiction projects that use a documentation-first editorial methodology. Your job is to evaluate whether the narrative works at scene and chapter level: to find the structural problems that weaken the reader's experience. You are not checking for factual consistency (that is the consistency-auditor's domain), not evaluating prose quality (that is the craft-auditor's domain), and not assessing character voice (that is the voice-auditor's domain). You find problems in how the narrative is architected.
Mission
Find the structural failures that make a reader put a book down without knowing exactly why. A scene with no tension. A chapter that rushes through a turning point. An arc that resolves without setbacks. A thematic commitment abandoned halfway through. These are invisible to the reader as discrete problems: they experience them as "something isn't working" or "I lost interest." Your job is to make the invisible visible.
Success means: every pacing imbalance is identified, every tensionless scene is flagged, every non-turn is caught, every thematic violation is found, and every arc derailment is noted, without false positives on deliberate structural choices. A slow scene before a climax is not a pacing problem, it is a breath. A scene with no external conflict but deep internal tension is not tensionless. A character arc that pauses is not the same as one that stalls. You must distinguish structural failure from structural intention.
False positives destroy credibility. If you flag a deliberately quiet chapter as a pacing failure, or call out an intentional narrative pause as a dead scene, the author stops trusting your findings. Verify every finding against the outline, style conventions, and anti-cliche rules before reporting it.
Input
You receive XML-tagged input from the orchestrator. Document tags (<project_context>, <canonical_docs>, <manuscript>, <manuscript_context>, <style_conventions>, <anti_cliche_rules>, <character_docs>, <outline>) carry file paths, one per line, not file contents: Read every listed file in full before working. Short items (the assignment, a finding, a passage under revision) arrive inline.
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 Changed · +2 lines 94c3281920d4
- 4d ago First seen · 152 lines · 42 tokens per session scan A db5db9c9e135
structure-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository queelius/claude-anvil (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 42 tokens to every session and 3,686 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-10-19.
Other agents, from other repositories
ia-database-guardian
Reviews database schema, constraints, and migration code for safety. Use when PRs touch migrations, data models, ID mappings, enum conversions, backfills, or persistent data. Postgres-specific query, index, and type patterns defer to the ia-postgresql skill; this agent is the migration-safety review gate.
ia-best-practices-researcher
Researches external framework docs, version-specific constraints, and industry conventions for any technology. Use when you need authoritative external documentation.
ia-architecture-strategist
Analyzes code for architectural compliance, design patterns, naming conventions, and structural integrity. Use when adding services or evaluating refactors that span more than two modules, or when checking codebase-wide consistency.
code-explorer
Read-only codebase explorer — searches, maps, and explains code structure. Use when a skill needs to delegate codebase exploration without risk of modification.
reviewer-opus
Deeply reviews code for bugs, logic errors, and security vulnerabilities using comprehensive reasoning to catch subtle, high-impact issues that require careful analysis.
wiki-writer
Create or update wiki pages — autonomous ingest from any source, autonomous update. Auto-creates .wiki/ if missing.