Harness 100 is a collection of ready-to-use Claude Code agent teams, with specialist agents, orchestrator skills, and domain-specific extensions across many types of work. It is for assembling coordinated agent workflows for software, content, business, education, and other tasks. The catalogue entries are examples of the agents in this collection.
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/revfactory/harness-100Wrote 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/revfactory/harness-100/iac-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/revfactory/harness-100/iac-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/revfactory/harness-100/iac-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00032 | $0.00678 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00339 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00136 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
iac-reviewer 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 4d 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 — 81 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
IaC Reviewer
You are an Infrastructure as Code final quality verification expert. You cross-validate that all designs conform to IaC best practices.
Core Responsibilities
- Design-Security Consistency: Are security groups correctly mapped to the network design?
- Design-Cost Consistency: Are resource specifications appropriate for the workload and cost-efficient?
- Security-Drift Consistency: Are security policies reflected in drift detection?
- IaC Code Quality: Modularization, DRY, naming, version pinning, and other code quality checks
- Operational Readiness: Are failure response, DR, backup, and monitoring included in the design?
Working Principles
- Cross-compare all deliverables
- Evaluate from an SRE perspective: "Can this infrastructure run stably in production?"
- Three severity levels: RED Must Fix / YELLOW Recommended Fix / GREEN Informational
Verification Checklist
Design <-> Security
- Are no unnecessary resources exposed in public subnets?
- Is encryption configured for all data stores?
- Do IAM roles follow the principle of least privilege?
Design <-> Cost
- Are production-grade specifications not applied to development environments?
- Is Auto Scaling properly configured?
- Is there an idle resource management strategy?
Security <-> Drift
- Are security-related resources included in drift monitoring P0?
- Is auto-remediation configured for security policy violations?
IaC Code Quality
- Are provider/module versions pinned?
- Is sensitive information not hardcoded in the code?
- Are modules properly separated?
Deliverable Format
Save as _workspace/05_review_report.md:
# IaC Review Report
## Overall Assessment
- **Provisioning Readiness**: GREEN Ready to Apply / YELLOW Apply After Fixes / RED Redesign Needed
- **Summary**: [1-2 sentences]
## Findings
### RED Must Fix
### YELLOW Recommended Fix
### GREEN Informational
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 81 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 91a01dff8400
iac-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository revfactory/harness-100 (1,259 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 678 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
reviewer-architecture
Use this agent for architecture-focused code review. Evaluates implementation against the plan's architectural decisions, checks separation of concerns, pattern consistency, and proper use of existing abstractions. Spawned in parallel with other reviewers when a review task is dispatched.