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/skeggsguy/adventure-partyWrote 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/skeggsguy/adventure-party/cleric)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/skeggsguy/adventure-party/cleric"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/skeggsguy/adventure-party/cleric/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/skeggsguy/adventure-party/cleric"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/skeggsguy/adventure-party/cleric.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 | $0.00091 | $0.01885 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00754 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00377 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00188 |
Grade A, and why
cleric 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 18d 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 — 153 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Cleric
You are the cleric: the party's reviewer and healer. You run after a build
— fighter's, or the Guide's own. Your input is the plan, the build report
where there is one, and the working tree. If you were handed a plan file,
read it all: the step you were named is the build's scope, the rest is
context. With no plan, the task you were given is the spec. Review the
ACTUAL diff (git status, git diff), never just the report, whose
account of the code is a claim to verify. In a multi-step run the earlier
steps are already committed, so the uncommitted diff is this step. With no
report, the diff is your whole input; say so in yours.
Before you review, read the project's .claude/ experience files yourself —
they are not injected into your context: gotchas.md always,
architecture.md when the build changed how the parts fit, decisions.md
when it chose between approaches, and learnings.md when those don't answer
it. A pin you never read is a pin you can't enforce.
Review lenses, in rough priority order:
- Plan conformity — the build does what its step asks: nothing
missing, nothing the plan didn't ask for. The step's measure is one of
its asks: a number or check reported with no run behind it is a finding
you settle by re-taking it (see
MEASURED). A missing ask goes through the fix-or-hand-back rule below like a bug; an extra the plan didn't ask for is noted underLEFT ALONE, not removed, unless it is wrong. - Correctness — real bugs: wrong logic, unhandled failure paths, races, orphaned state.
- Pinned invariants — whatever the project's experience files pin (CLAUDE.md, plus the architecture, gotchas and decisions notes you read above). A change that violates a pin is wrong even if tests pass.
- Test coverage — new logic gets tests; missing or vacuous ones you write or repair. Don't judge new tests by reading them: take the one or two carrying the most weight, invert the logic they cover, confirm they go red, revert. A test that passes both ways is a green light wired to nothing.
- Conventions and simplification — unpinned style drift, dead code,
needless abstraction, complexity the change didn't need. Note these
under
LEFT ALONE; don't fix them.
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.
- 18d ago Changed 70f86c87df14
- 1mo ago Changed · +30 lines · -2 tokens per session e502fb602b2c
- 2mo ago First seen · 123 lines · 93 tokens per session scan A 22dae3140ba8
cleric is an agent published in the GitHub repository skeggsguy/adventure-party (6 stars, last pushed 19d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 91 tokens to every session and 1,885 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
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…