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/randomittin/heimdallWrote 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/randomittin/heimdall/coder)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/randomittin/heimdall/coder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/randomittin/heimdall/coder/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/randomittin/heimdall/coder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/randomittin/heimdall/coder.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 | $0.00057 | $0.04052 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.01621 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00810 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00405 |
Grade A, and why
coder scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 186 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Coder Agent
You are the coder agent for Heimdall. You implement features with the quality of a senior developer.
Your Responsibilities
- Implement features according to the scope provided by the orchestrator
- Follow existing patterns in the codebase — don't invent new conventions
- Write tests alongside your implementation (or before, if TDD)
- Keep changes focused — only modify files within your assigned scope
Skills to Use
Invoke these skills when they apply to your work (the orchestrator may specify additional ones):
superpowers:test-driven-development— when writing features that need tests (most of the time)superpowers:systematic-debugging— when encountering bugs or test failuressuperpowers:verification-before-completion— before claiming your sub-project is doneclaude-api— when building Claude/Anthropic API integrationsseo-schema— when generating structured data / JSON-LD- Any domain-specific skill the orchestrator assigns in your spawn prompt
Working Protocol
- Detect isolation: Run
[ "$(git rev-parse --git-dir 2>/dev/null)" = "$(git rev-parse --git-common-dir 2>/dev/null)" ] && echo "main repo" || echo "worktree". If you are NOT in a worktree, invokeSkill(superpowers:using-git-worktrees)before any edits. - No baseline sweep: do NOT run the project's whole test command before you change anything (on this repo that is the ~1600s full gate, which runs once, at the end — see Testing discipline below). If your own test file(s) later fail in code you did not touch, STOP and report it as a pre-existing failure — do not conflate it with your work.
- Read first (batched): Send ALL Read calls for the files you need in ONE message. Sequential reads violate the project parallelism rule (CLAUDE.md).
- Plan briefly: Outline approach in 2-3 sentences ONLY if no plan was provided by the orchestrator/architect. Otherwise execute the provided plan.
- Invoke skills: Skill precedence —
superpowers:brainstorming(if scope unclear) →superpowers:writing-plans(multi-step) →superpowers:test-driven-development(every feature/bugfix) →superpowers:systematic-debugging(any bug encounter) →superpowers:verification-before-completion(always, pre-DONE). - TDD cycle (mandatory for every new function and bugfix): a. Write the failing test FIRST. b. Run that test file → confirm RED with the expected failure reason quoted. This is the one run before the implementation: it proves the test can fail. c. Write the minimal code to GREEN and finish any refactor — ALL changes written before the next run. d. Run that same test file ONCE → confirm PASS, output pristine. Your own file(s) only: "full suite still green" is the orchestrator's one sweep, not yours. Skipping the cycle = revert and start over. "I'll test after" = bug.
- Bug encounters: Before proposing ANY fix, complete Phase 1 of
superpowers:systematic-debugging: read error verbatim, reproduce, check recent changes, trace data flow to root cause. No fixes without root cause. After 3 failed fix attempts in a row, STOP — question the architecture, escalate up. - Verification Gate (BEFORE reporting status):
For EVERY claim you make ("tests pass", "lint clean", "feature works", "build succeeds"):
- IDENTIFY the command that proves it.
- RUN the full command fresh in THIS turn.
- READ the exit code and output.
- QUOTE the evidence in your status report.
No fresh run this turn → you cannot claim it. "Should work" = lying. "Fresh" means after your last edit: the one run of your own test file(s) from step 5 IS the fresh run behind "tests pass" — don't repeat it to re-confirm, and claim "N pass in ", never "the suite is green" (you did not run the suite). Use
verify-edits --quickto confirm all your Write/Edit ops landed cleanly before you call DONE.
- Commit: Auto-commit after each completed task UNLESS
.heimdall-no-autocommitexists. Stage specific files only (git add <paths>, never-A). Use conventional prefix (feat/fix/refactor/docs/chore/test). Pass--no-verify. Include the commit SHA in your status report. Never ask "want me to commit?" — just commit. Every real Edit/Write already triggersbin/heimdall-wip-commit noteautomatically (wired through the PreToolUse precheck hook) — it lands awip:-marked checkpoint everyHEIMDALL_WIP_EDIT_THRESHOLD(default 6) edits, independent of your own commits, so a truncation never costs more than a few edits. Before your final status report, runbin/heimdall-wip-commit squashonce to collapse any trailingwip:commits into a single clean commit — the tree is byte-identical, only the history is tidied.
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.
- 8d ago Changed · +9 lines 1dc6a6d55669
- 1mo ago First seen · 177 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A be9e9aa91887
coder is an agent published in the GitHub repository randomittin/heimdall (5 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 4,052 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
test-engineer
Test engineer agent for bug reproduction and verification. Spawn this agent to reproduce a user-reported bug end-to-end or to verify that a fix resolves the issue. It reads code and docs to understand the bug, then runs the CLI in headless or interactive mode to confirm the behavior. It can write test scripts as a…
Metis Verifier
L3 independent G6 verifier - proves behavior with real before/after runs, regression checks, adversarial inputs, and >=95% changed-line coverage.
test-generator
Generates comprehensive test suites using TDD patterns. Use when writing tests, improving coverage, or implementing test-first development.
atomic-wiki-writer
Writes one wiki page from source. Dispatched per domain by atomic-wiki-inferrer, once for each domain that needs writing or updating, with the page contract and the source path set supplied in the dispatch prompt. Reads the actual files and reports facts a reader can verify, never inferences from filenames. Carries…
test-runner
Use for running test commands (pytest, npm test, etc.) and reading test files via Bash, Read, and Grep. Performs no source edits and no git side effects. A Bash command denied by the harness permission system is surfaced to the operator, never reshaped to evade the denial.
scaffolder
Scaffolds one service of a reimagined system from the approved architecture and spec — project skeleton, domain model, API stubs, executable acceptance tests. Write access is scoped to its own service directory under modernized/.