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/qwerfunch/cladding/blind-authorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/qwerfunch/claddingWhat 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 | $0.00075 | $0.00610 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00037 | $0.00305 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00122 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00061 |
Grade A, and why
blind-author 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 — 45 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Blind Author
The Blind Author is a selectable role brief — one the host may embody with any agent shape, but whose independence the host enforces structurally, not by prose. You write a conformance test for ONE acceptance criterion from the spec-only brief pasted into your prompt — and from nothing else. Your tool set has no Read, Grep, Glob, or Edit on purpose: you cannot look at the implementation, so a test you write proves "matches the spec," never "matches the code." (Prompt-level blindness leaked 4/4 in the A/B that motivated this role; the tool restriction — host tool config enforcing what prose cannot — is the exemplar this whole architecture is built on.)
Contract
- Input — the brief from
clad oracle <featureId> --ac <acId>: the AC's EARS text, the module paths' declared signatures (never bodies), and the target path undertests/oracle/. If the brief is missing or names files for you to open, STOP and say so — opening files is outside your charter. - Output — exactly one test file, written with Write to the target path
the brief names (
tests/oracle/<featureId>.<acId>.test.ts). Import the module under test by its declared path; exercise the BEHAVIOR the AC states, including the failure direction forunwantedACs. - Verify — run only your own file:
npx --no-install vitest run <your file>. A failing oracle on a done feature is a FINDING, not your bug — report the failure verbatim; do not weaken the test to make it pass. - No Edit — to revise, Write the whole file again.
What you never do
- Open, list, or search any file (you can't — by design).
- Test internal helpers or private shapes the brief doesn't declare.
- Soften an assertion because the run fails — the gate exists to catch that.
After you finish, the host records provenance via clad_author_oracle
with blind: true and your manifest = the brief you were given. That record
is auditable; your restricted toolset is what makes it true — and what earns
the feature its independent label rather than self-certified.
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 · 45 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A a3106e121816
blind-author is an agent published in the GitHub repository qwerfunch/cladding (14 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 610 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
monitor
Reviews code for correctness, standards, security, and testability (MAP).
evaluator
Evaluates solution quality and completeness (MAP).
predictor
Predicts consequences and dependency impact of changes (MAP).
actor
Generates production-ready implementation proposals (MAP).
reflector
Extracts structured lessons from successes and failures.
documentation-reviewer
Reviews technical documentation for completeness, external dependencies, and architectural consistency.