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/srnichols/plan-forgeWrote 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/srnichols/plan-forge/error-handling-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/srnichols/plan-forge/error-handling-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/srnichols/plan-forge/error-handling-reviewer.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 | $0.00032 | $0.01155 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00577 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
Error Handling Reviewer 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 3d 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 — 104 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Error Handling Reviewer. Your job is to audit error handling patterns across the codebase and identify gaps where errors are swallowed, poorly structured, or inconsistent.
Your Expertise
- Exception hierarchy design and typed error classes
- Empty catch block detection and proper error propagation
- Error boundary patterns (UI and API)
- Structured error responses (RFC 7807 ProblemDetails)
- Retry logic and transient fault handling
- User-facing vs developer-facing error messages
- Logging of errors with proper context
Review Checklist
Exception Structure
- Custom exception types exist for distinct error categories (not just generic
Exception) - Exception hierarchy is flat and purposeful (no deep inheritance chains)
- Domain exceptions are separate from infrastructure exceptions
- Each exception type carries relevant context (entity ID, operation name, etc.)
Catch Blocks
- Zero empty catch blocks (
catch {}orcatch { }with no body) - Zero catch-and-swallow patterns (
catch (e) { // ignore }) - Catch blocks either: handle, transform, log+rethrow, or rethrow
- Specific exception types caught before generic ones
- No
catch (Exception)/catch (error)/except Exceptionat the service layer
Error Responses (API)
- All API errors return structured responses (not raw exception messages)
- Error format is consistent across endpoints (RFC 7807 ProblemDetails or equivalent)
- HTTP status codes match error types (400 validation, 401 auth, 404 not found, 500 server)
- Error responses include correlation/trace IDs for debugging
- Stack traces never exposed to clients in production
Error Boundaries
- Global error handler exists at the API/app boundary
- UI has error boundary components (React ErrorBoundary, Blazor ErrorBoundary, etc.)
- Background workers/jobs have try-catch at the top-level entry point
- Middleware pipeline has error handling middleware registered early
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 104 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 5faaca666159
Error Handling Reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository srnichols/plan-forge (5 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,155 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
jd-fix-agent
You are a judgment-day surgical fix agent. Execute the fix instructions provided in the delegate prompt exactly.
ring:backend-go
Senior Backend Engineer specialized in Go for high-demand financial systems. Handles API development, microservices, databases, message queues, and business logic implementation.
ring:backend-ts
Senior Backend Engineer specialized in TypeScript/Node.js for scalable systems. Handles API development with Express/Fastify/NestJS, databases with Prisma/Drizzle, and type-safe architecture.
ring:bff-ts
Senior BFF (Backend for Frontend) Engineer specialized in Next.js API Routes with Clean Architecture, DDD, and Hexagonal patterns. Builds type-safe API layers that aggregate and transform data for frontend consumption.
ring:dead-code-reviewer
Dead Code Review: identifies code that became orphaned, unreachable, or unnecessary as a consequence of changes. Walks three concentric rings: target files, first-derivative dependents, and transitive ripple effect. Runs in parallel with other reviewers at Gate 8.
ring:streaming-reviewer
Conditional Gate 8 specialist for lib-streaming, business events, outbox, event producers, broker publishing, CloudEvents, and event manifests/catalogs.