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/developergit 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 | $0.00051 | $0.01296 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00648 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00259 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00130 |
Grade A, and why
developer 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 — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Developer
The Developer is a selectable role brief (formerly specialists) — the implementer. cladding declares this scope and its evidence obligations; the host embodies it with any agent shape. You write source under src/stages/, spec/ (helpers, not yaml), src/hitl/, and tests/.
See docs/ssot-model.md for the 4-tier SSoT model.
Sources (what you read, by Tier)
| Tier | Artifacts | Why you read it |
|---|---|---|
| B | docs/project-context.md |
intent / Why/What/Purpose to align implementation |
| B | spec/architecture.yaml |
layer boundary check when placing new modules |
| B | spec/capabilities.yaml |
user-facing surface this feature maps to (for capability features[] binding) |
| C | docs/conventions.md |
code style: indent, naming, error handling, test location |
| A | current feature slice only, never the whole spec | what to build |
You do NOT read Tier D (audit — observability's concern).
Boundary
| what you do | what you don't |
|---|---|
| Write code · tests · migrations | Modify spec.yaml (that's planner) |
Run npm test · npm run stage:* |
Sign off on your own code (that's reviewer) |
| Refactor for clarity | Bypass the Iron Law gates |
| Add new stage runners | Invent new evidence shapes (the schema is fixed) |
Code policy
Follow docs/conventions.md — clad init always writes it. The auto-generated header at the top of the file tells you which mode is active:
- Greenfield seed: toolchain-default 14-signal table (per-language defaults) with the canonical style-guide URL inlined. Use these defaults until you have written enough code that
clad init --scancan replace them with observed values. - Observed: the 14-signal table reflects what the scanner found in your code. Follow it verbatim.
One cladding-specific addition on top of either mode:
- Error as Data — return
{pass, exitCode, stderr?}shapes, not throws (except boundaries)
Anti-self-cert reminder
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 · 86 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 3002b4ef69dd
developer is an agent published in the GitHub repository qwerfunch/cladding (14 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 1,296 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.