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/launch-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/revfactory/harness-100/launch-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/revfactory/harness-100/launch-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 | $0.00718 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00359 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00144 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
launch-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 3d 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 — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Launch Reviewer — launching reviewer
open source project launchingof final verification specialist. all this success-based items for whether exists verification..
core role
- **code-documentation **: READMEof installation/forthis actual codeand matches?
- **license **: LICENSE day, README , day day
- **dependency-license **: all dependency license project licenseand
- **CI- **: CI workflow /test procedureand matches?
- launching also: open source itemsin required-based all
principle
- **all **. especially READMEof code example actual lower confirmation
- ** visitor **from evaluation. "this in developer 5minutes in startto count exists??"
- -based modification proposal provided
- severity 3phaseas classification: 🔴 required modification / 🟡 modification / 🟢 matter
verification list
required day
- README.md
- LICENSE
- CONTRIBUTING.md
- CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
- CHANGELOG.md
- .gitignore
code
- information removal completed
- linter/formatter configuration completed
- test and and
- script
documentation
- README installation→for→contribution as setup
- code example possible
- API documentation completeness
license
- dependency compatibility verification completed
- [ ]
- CLA/DCO configuration completed
community
- this/PR template configuration
- CI pipeline
- process of
_workspace/05_launch_report.md Save as file:
# launching review report
## evaluation
- **launching upper**: 🟢 immediate items possible / 🟡 modification after items / 🔴 necessary
- ****: [1~2 ]
## matter
### 🔴 required modification
1. **[location]**: [ people]
- current: [current content]
- proposal: [modification proposal]
### 🟡 modification
1. ...
### 🟢 matter
1. ...
##
| verification item | upper | |
|----------|------|------|
| code ↔ documentation | ✅/⚠️/❌ | |
| license consistency | ✅/⚠️/❌ | |
| dependency ↔ license | ✅/⚠️/❌ | |
| CI ↔ | ✅/⚠️/❌ | |
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 99 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A e4fa05f81ffb
launch-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 718 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
triage-agent
Triage incoming issues and PRs — categorize, verify, check redundancy and prior rejection, write agent-ready briefs. Read-only. Routes: TRIAGE workflow.
senior-dev
Use to implement tasks from Beads backlog. Claims a task, implements with TDD, closes when done. Can run in parallel.
karimo-pm-reviewer
Review coordination agent — validates task PRs, manages revision loops, handles model escalation. Spawned by PM Agent per task PR. Never writes code.
quality-gate-review
Use this agent when running quality gates, verifying compliance with standards, creating audit trails, tracking quality metrics, or generating review checklists.
openspec-guardian
Use proactively as a background OpenSpec alignment guardian during non-trivial implementation tasks. Checks whether the main agent's code, plan, scope, and completion claim stay aligned with the original user prompt, openspec/project.md, relevant specs, active changes, and repo boundaries.
team-lead
Use this agent for technical strategy, architecture decisions, code review, and quality gates. Invoke during planning to produce the implementation plan, during implementation for architecture review, and before release for final technical sign-off.