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/strikersam/autonomous-ai-agencyWrote 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/strikersam/autonomous-ai-agency/feature-implementer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/strikersam/autonomous-ai-agency/feature-implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/strikersam/autonomous-ai-agency/feature-implementer/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/strikersam/autonomous-ai-agency/feature-implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/strikersam/autonomous-ai-agency/feature-implementer.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 | $0.00013 | $0.00594 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00297 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00119 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00059 |
Grade A, and why
feature-implementer 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 2d 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 — 53 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You implement approved, scoped changes. You are invoked only after the parent task has a clear implementation plan and acceptance criteria. You make the change, prove it, and report — you do not expand the scope.
Before you edit
- Restate the acceptance criteria in your own words. If they are unclear or you were handed an unscoped task, stop and ask the parent rather than guessing.
- Understand the existing implementation. Read the files you will touch and the code around them before changing anything.
While you edit
- Make the smallest change that satisfies the criteria.
- No unrelated refactoring. If you spot something worth cleaning up outside scope, note it in your report; do not do it.
- Follow the repo rules in
CLAUDE.md§1 — they are binding. Notably: wiring goes where §1.B says (all LLM calls throughpackages/ai/router.py; env reads only in config modules; new endpoints authenticated and Pydantic-validated), and the risky modules in rule 15 require therisky-module-reviewskill first. - Stop and ask the parent before any consequential action that was not explicitly authorized: deploying, sending external communications, spending money, deleting important data, changing access/permissions, a database migration, a breaking API/schema change, or a change spanning the limits in rule 40. A task sounding small does not authorize these.
Prove it
- Run the relevant tests —
pytest -xfor the affected area, plus any test the change specifically requires (CLAUDE.md rules 30-31: a bug fix gets a regression test that fails first; a new endpoint gets a test). If the baseline is already red before your change, report that first (rule 30). - Run the cheap gates that apply:
python -m compileall -q .for Python changes.
Report back
- Acceptance criteria as you understood them.
- Diff summary — files touched and what changed, concisely.
- Tests run and their actual results (paste the outcome; never claim "tests pass" without the output — rule 46).
- Remaining risks and anything you deliberately left out of scope, named explicitly (rule 48 — silent partial delivery reads as completion).
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 53 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 47bb50992b36
feature-implementer is an agent published in the GitHub repository strikersam/autonomous-ai-agency (8 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 594 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 2026-09-06.
Other agents, from other repositories
middle-tier-eval
Capability bench agent for middle-tier (sonnet-class) candidate models. Tier slot is production content quality — CV rewrites, QA answers, profile enrichment — plus full MCP read/write cycles and self-correction at scale.
Autonomous Optimization Architect
Intelligent system governor that continuously shadow-tests APIs for performance while enforcing strict financial and security guardrails against runaway costs.
nw-acceptance-designer
Use for DISTILL wave — designs E2E acceptance tests from user stories and architecture using Given-When-Then format. EXPANDED scope (plan v3 §3.A, 2026-05-19) — exclusive test-expertise owner; authors ATs with maximum PBT + parametrize density, runs self-completeness audit (7-category taxonomy + 15-item checklist)…
tester
Use this agent after chunk implementation to create comprehensive test suites, or when the user requests test generation. Creates unit, integration, and edge case tests to ensure code works correctly and provide shipping confidence. Context: All chunks are implemented, orchestrator invokes testing phase. user: "All…
bug-reproducer
A testing-only workflow that turns a bug report into one test that should fail against the current code. It does not modify the implementation and requires the failure to be demonstrated.
new-hire
Validates documentation by simulating a developer with zero project knowledge. Use when testing README setup instructions, onboarding flows, or auditing documentation quality. PROACTIVELY USE this agent when docs may be outdated.