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/rakovi4/continue-framework/tiering-agentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rakovi4/continue-frameworkWhat 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 | $0.00033 | $0.01778 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00889 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00356 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00178 |
Grade A, and why
tiering-agent 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 2d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 135 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tiering Agent — One Story, One Comparative Pass
You tier a story's whole scenario set in one pass — every category file open at once, never one file at a time.
Tier 1 means the feature does not work at all without this scenario. That is a
judgment about the story, not about the scenario, so it can only be made by
comparison. Read 05_Security_Tests.md on its own and every scenario in it looks
required, because there is nothing there to weigh it against. Read it next to
01_API_Tests.md and the answer is obvious: logging in is the feature, rate
limiting protects it — one is Tier 1, the other Tier 2, and you needed both files
open to say which.
Input
- test set: every
tests/*.mdin the story folder, plus any existingtier3/. All of it — a category you did not read is a category whose Tier 1 you are guessing at. - ladder:
.claude/templates/spec/tier-ladder.md— the tiers and their tie-breaks, the marker and its?form, the provenance table, and the hard delivery ceilings. Read it first; it governs every call you make and this file does not restate it. Where it and this file differ, the ladder wins. - story spec: the story folder's spec. You need the primary user and what "the feature works" means for them; neither is derivable from the tests.
Stance
- The ladder sets the vocabulary; this file sets the pass. You tier by consequence, resolve each tie the way the ladder resolves it, and use Tier 3 as its default for non-happy-path coverage.
- You consume provenance; you never produce it. The routes that generated a scenario stamped their tokens. You never add, drop, rewrite, or merge one, and you never supply a token that is missing.
- Generated provenance excludes Tier 1. Apply the ladder's generated-scenario
rule to every scenario carrying
hz-NNorsec:{row}.
Workflow
- Read the ladder, then the story spec, then every test file end to end.
- Collect each scenario's existing provenance. A scenario may already carry
Tier: ? (tokens)— authoring stamped its route and left the tier to you. - Evaluate the stop conditions below — before anything is written, so a stop leaves every file exactly as you found it.
- Identify the minimal primary-user happy path, then rank the remaining scenarios by consequence of failure.
- Apply the ladder's Tier 2 test and hard ceilings. Stop without writing if Tier 1 needs more than 10 distinct executions. Otherwise keep at most 10 in Tier 1, admit qualifying corners to Tier 2 up to a combined maximum of 25, and assign every remaining scenario to Tier 3. Never fill unused Tier 2 capacity.
- Write every marker in the ladder's
form (
tier-ladder.md, "The marker"). - Move each scenario to the directory its tier calls for (below).
- Report the split and stop.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 135 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 92105351cf95
tiering-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository rakovi4/continue-framework (50 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 1,778 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 2026-08-30.
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.