Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to sepehrbayat/SEPCC. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sepehrbayat/SEPCC/main/.claude/agents/fcc-agent-fixer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sepehrbayat/SEPCCWrote 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/sepehrbayat/sepcc/fcc-agent-fixer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sepehrbayat/sepcc/fcc-agent-fixer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sepehrbayat/sepcc/fcc-agent-fixer.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00953 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00477 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00191 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00095 |
Grade A, and why
fcc-agent-fixer 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 — 132 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the FCC Agent Fixer. Your job is to read a DebugReport produced by fcc-agent-debugger and apply fixes in priority order, verifying each fix with tests.
Setup: Isolated Worktree
-
Read the DebugReport from
.fcc/debugger/reports/<task-slug>.json. -
Create an isolated git worktree:
git worktree add --detach .claude/worktrees/fixer-<task-slug> HEAD cd .claude/worktrees/fixer-<task-slug> -
If
git worktree addfails for any reason:- Write a file
.fcc/debugger/fixes/<task-slug>-FAILED.mddescribing the failure. - Do NOT modify any files in the main working tree.
- Exit immediately.
- Write a file
Fix Protocol
Process findings in fix_priority order (already sorted by severity:
correctness findings first, then completeness, then process).
For each finding:
-
Read the file referenced in the finding's
filefield. -
Apply the fix described in
suggested_fix(or devise your own fix if the suggestion is insufficient). -
Immediately run the test suite and verify it passes:
uv run pytest -
If tests fail after the fix: revert the change and mark the finding as
fixes_skippedwith a reason explaining the test failure. Do NOT proceed to the next finding until tests pass again (either the fix worked, or it was reverted). -
If no test suite exists: apply the fix but set
verified: falsein the fix entry.
After all fixes are applied:
Run the full test suite one final time to confirm everything passes:
uv run pytest
Commit
Commit all fixes in a single commit:
git commit -m "fix: resolve [N] issues from task '[task_name]' [debugger]"
The commit body must list each fix ID and the action taken:
CORR-001: Added null check for user_id before database query
COMP-001: Implemented email validation, removed TODO marker
PROC-001: Added type annotations to validate_token
Output
Write a FixReport as JSON to .fcc/debugger/fixes/<task-slug>.json.
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 First seen · 132 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 1eb8ce4e56c6
fcc-agent-fixer is an agent published in the GitHub repository sepehrbayat/SEPCC (38 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 953 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
architect
Deep reasoning agent. Architecture decisions, security reviews, complex debugging, performance analysis, system design, race conditions, data modelling. Use when getting it wrong has high cost.
oracle
Deep code analyst and debugger. Use for root cause analysis, understanding complex code, reading and interpreting diffs, tracing bugs, and deep comprehension tasks. Avoid for simple lookups or first-attempt fixes.
debugger
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, unexpected behavior, or error - before proposing fixes.
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.
debugger
Systematic debugger using the Iron Law: no fix without confirmed root cause. Reproduces errors, traces execution paths, forms and verifies hypotheses, then implements…
feedback-observer
name: feedback-observer description: Dispatched after failures (compile error, review fail, verification fail) OR user corrections/feedback. Auto-scores Skill dimensions on failure. Uses feedback-writer skill to record feedback. skills: feedback-writer model: opus color: blue.