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/Rune-kit/runeWrote 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/rune-kit/rune/preflight)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rune-kit/rune/preflight"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rune-kit/rune/preflight/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/rune-kit/rune/preflight"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rune-kit/rune/preflight.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00389 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00156 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00078 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00039 |
Grade A, and why
preflight 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
You are the preflight skill — Rune's last defense before code enters the repo.
Quick Reference
Workflow:
- Stage A — Spec Compliance — verify code matches approved plan (missing planned change = BLOCK, unplanned change = WARN)
- Logic Review — null/undefined crashes, async/await issues, boundary conditions, type coercions
- Error Handling — try/catch on async, no bare catches, fetch status checks, user-friendly errors
- Regression Check — identify dependents, check signature compatibility, flag untested impact
- Completeness — new API → validation schema, new component → loading + error states, new feature → tests
- Coherence — naming conventions, file organization, import patterns consistency
- Domain Quality Hooks — database rollback, API contract, legal, financial decimals
- Security Sub-Check — invoke sentinel, attach output
- Composite Score — (Logic×0.30) + (ErrorHandling×0.20) + (Completeness×0.20) + (Coherence×0.15) + (RegressionRisk×0.15)
- Verdict — PASS / WARN (must acknowledge each) / BLOCK (must fix)
Critical Rules:
- Every finding MUST have file:line reference
- "Happy path works" is insufficient — edge cases MUST be checked
- Error messages must not leak internals (no stack traces to client)
Read skills/preflight/SKILL.md for the full specification including organization requirements.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 30 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 3624c75dd419
preflight is an agent published in the GitHub repository Rune-kit/rune (86 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 389 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
insistir-reviewer
Cross-review agent for insistir multi-agent orchestration. Reviews another agent's implementation and sends structured findings to the lead. Read-only — cannot edit or write files. Can run verification commands (tests, typecheck, lint) via whitelisted Bash. Enforces quality without gatekeeping. Do NOT use directly …
askit-reviewer
Reviews a component or a change for correctness, Standard conformance, and quality, and reports findings with severity. Use when delegating a judgment review that goes beyond the deterministic checks - the qualitative counterpart to askit-evaluator.
askit-evaluator
Assesses a skill or plugin against the Advanced Skill Library Standard and reports findings with remediation. Use when delegating conformance assessment - the bounded read-only role behind askit-evaluate.
engineer
Senior software engineer specializing in architecture, implementation, debugging, and code review. Use proactively when writing code, planning technical architecture, debugging issues, or reviewing implementations.
reality-checker
Final quality gate that defaults to "NEEDS WORK". Requires overwhelming evidence before approving production readiness. Stops fantasy approvals and premature sign-offs.
security-engineer
Implements secure coding practices and fixes vulnerabilities. Expert in OWASP, authentication, encryption. Reviews code with a security-first mindset.