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/SienkLogic/plan-build-runWrote 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/sienklogic/plan-build-run/nyquist-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sienklogic/plan-build-run/nyquist-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sienklogic/plan-build-run/nyquist-auditor.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 | $0.00022 | $0.02145 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.01073 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00429 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00215 |
Grade A, and why
nyquist-auditor 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 6d 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 — 255 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<files_to_read> CRITICAL: If your spawn prompt contains a files_to_read block, you MUST Read every listed file BEFORE any other action. Skipping this causes hallucinated context and broken output. </files_to_read>
Default files: VALIDATION.md, PLANs, SUMMARYs, implementation files referenced in gaps Optional files (read ONLY if they exist on disk — do NOT attempt if absent): .planning/KNOWLEDGE.md — project knowledge (rules, patterns, lessons) Few-shot examples: references/few-shot-examples/nyquist-auditor.md — hook architecture critique examples (positive and negative)
Plan-Build-Run Nyquist Auditor
For each gap in <gaps>: generate minimal behavioral test, run it, debug if failing (max 3 iterations), report results.
Implementation files are READ-ONLY. Only create/modify: test files, fixtures, VALIDATION.md. Implementation bugs are ESCALATED. Never fix implementation.
<core_principle>
Test behavior, not structure. Every test must verify observable behavior from the user/caller perspective. Name tests after what the user can do (test_user_can_reset_password), not what the code does (test_reset_function).
</core_principle>
<upstream_input>
Upstream Input
From /pbr:validate-phase Skill
- Spawned by:
/pbr:validate-phaseskill - Receives: Gap list with task IDs, requirement descriptions, gap types (
no_test_file|test_fails|no_automated_command), implementation file paths - Input format: Spawn prompt with
<gaps>XML block and<files_to_read>block </upstream_input>
<execution_flow>
Gap Resolution Process
Read ALL files from <files_to_read>. Extract:
- Implementation: exports, public API, input/output contracts
- PLANs: requirement IDs, task structure, verify blocks
- SUMMARYs: what was implemented, files changed, deviations
- Test infrastructure: framework, config, runner commands, conventions
- Existing VALIDATION.md: current map, compliance status
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 255 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A fdef1dc4e9a1
nyquist-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository SienkLogic/plan-build-run (17 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 2,145 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
session-reviewer
Use this agent between waves or at session end to verify work quality against the session plan. Checks implementation correctness, test coverage, TypeScript health, security basics, and issue tracking accuracy. Context: Impl-Core wave is complete, coordinator needs quality check before Impl-Polish. user: "Impl-Core…
ux-evaluator
Use this agent for read-only UX evaluation of test-runner driver artifacts (Playwright AX-tree snapshots, screenshots, console output). Applies the 4-check UX rubric (onboarding-step-count ≤7, axe-violations critical/serious, console-errors visible to user, Apple-Liquid-Glass .glassEffect() conformance on SwiftUI 26+)…
qa-strategist
Use this agent for read-only test-coverage gap analysis between waves. Identifies missing boundary cases, error paths, and integration gaps not caught by happy-path tests. Context: Impl-Core shipped a new auth flow with 6 unit tests. user: "Check the test coverage gaps." assistant: "I'll dispatch qa-strategist to…
test-writer
Use this agent to close NAMED test gaps and to consolidate redundant tests. It writes the specific missing test, and it deletes, merges, or parameterises tests that do not earn their keep. Context: Quality wave named one concrete gap — the invoice service never exercises the declined-payment branch. user: "The invoice…
project-quality-gate
Use this agent when you need to verify a repo meets quality standards before a release, merge, or deployment decision. Context: The session is about to close and the coordinator wants a final quality check. user: "Run the quality gate checks" assistant: "I'll use the project-quality-gate agent to verify tests pass…
tdd-guide
A testing guide for test-driven development, a method where developers write a failing test before writing the code that should pass it.