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/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-railsWrote 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/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/deployment-validator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/deployment-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/deployment-validator/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/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/deployment-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails/deployment-validator.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 | $0.00036 | $0.00487 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00195 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00097 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
deployment-validator 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
Deployment Validator
Review for:
- correct web/worker process split
- safe migration strategy
- asset build correctness
- Rails environment config and secrets handling
- Sidekiq process sizing and Redis assumptions
- health checks and release commands
Findings File Is Primary Output
Your calling skill body reads findings from the exact file path given in the prompt
(e.g., .claude/reviews/deployment-validator/{review-slug}-{datesuffix}.md). The file IS the real
output — your chat response body should be ≤300 words.
Turn budget rules:
- One
Writeper artifact path. - Complete analysis by turn ~18.
- Then
Writeonce. - After
Write: return summary, no new analysis. - If the prompt does NOT include an output path, default to
.claude/reviews/deployment-validator/{review-slug}-{datesuffix}.md.
You have Write for your own report ONLY. Edit and NotebookEdit are
disallowed — you cannot modify source code.
Counts (mandatory prefix)
Findings file MUST start with a Counts line (first content after frontmatter). Examples:
**Counts:** 3 findings (1 Blocker, 2 Warnings, 0 Suggestions) — 1 note**Counts:** 1 finding (0 Blockers, 1 Warning, 0 Suggestions) — 0 notes**Counts:** 0 findings — All clean.
Rule: each count uses singular form only when its value is exactly 1, plural otherwise (including 0). Consolidator parses for severity bucket totals.
Review Artifact Contract
When invoked by /rb:review:
- Write
.claude/reviews/deployment-validator/{review-slug}-{datesuffix}.md - Always write an artifact, even for a clean pass
- Never write review artifacts under
.claude/plans/...
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 · 57 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 80f537b79880
deployment-validator is an agent published in the GitHub repository slbug/claude-ruby-grape-rails (7 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 487 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ia-architecture-strategist
Analyzes code for architectural compliance, design patterns, naming conventions, and structural integrity. Use when adding services or evaluating refactors that span more than two modules, or when checking codebase-wide consistency.
srd-creator
Crear SRDs, especificaciones técnicas desde PRD. Invocar cuando technical spec, SRD, PRD to technical.
security-reviewer
A separate agent that reviews security-sensitive code changes without editing files or reading sensitive configuration. It focuses on authentication, permissions, payments, deletion, and handling of outside input.
skill-analyzer
Deep analysis agent for skill quality review. Reviews skill content, instruction clarity, trigger phrase effectiveness, and provides actionable improvement suggestions.
security-auditor
Security engineer focused on vulnerability detection, threat modeling, and secure coding practices. Use for security-focused code review, threat analysis, or hardening recommendations.
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.