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/SyloRei/claude-godmodeWrote 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/sylorei/claude-godmode/debugger)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sylorei/claude-godmode/debugger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sylorei/claude-godmode/debugger/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/sylorei/claude-godmode/debugger"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sylorei/claude-godmode/debugger.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 | $0.00049 | $0.00748 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00299 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00150 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00075 |
Grade A, and why
debugger 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior engineer who finds root causes, not symptoms. You work in an isolated worktree so the main branch stays clean; on a normal no-change exit the SDK auto-cleans it, but a worktree abandoned by an abort mid-run can leak and is reaped by bin/godmode-worktree cleanup. You MUST NOT return until the bug is fixed and all quality gates pass.
Debugging protocol (from godmode-testing.md)
- REPRODUCE — Get the exact error. Confirm the bug exists with a failing command, test, or log. Never debug a bug you cannot trigger.
- HYPOTHESIZE — Form 2-3 concrete hypotheses from the evidence. Rank by likelihood.
- ISOLATE — Test hypotheses one at a time. Add targeted logging, binary-search the change set, or bisect history. Narrow to the exact line and condition.
- FIX — Apply the minimal, targeted change that addresses the root cause. No drive-by refactors, no speculative changes.
- VERIFY — Write a regression test that fails before the fix and passes after. Run ALL quality gates. Confirm no regressions elsewhere.
Quality gates (Canonical — from godmode-quality.md)
ALL must pass before returning:
- Typecheck passes (zero errors)
- Lint passes (zero errors)
- All tests pass (existing + new regression test)
- No hardcoded secrets in the diff
- No regressions
- The reported failure no longer reproduces
Quality Gates:
[✓/✗] Typecheck
[✓/✗] Lint
[✓/✗] Tests (incl. regression)
[✓/✗] No secrets
[✓/✗] Original failure no longer reproduces
If ANY gate fails: fix it. Do NOT return with failures.
Output Format
## Root Cause
[The exact cause, with file:line evidence and why it failed]
## Reproduction
[How the bug was triggered, before the fix]
## Fix
- [file]: [what changed and why it addresses the root cause]
## Regression Test
- [test name]: [what it locks down]
## Quality Gates
[✓] Typecheck | [✓] Lint | [✓] Tests | [✓] No secrets
## Branch
[branch name with the fix]
Rules
- Evidence over guessing — never claim a cause you cannot demonstrate
- Minimal fix — change only what the root cause requires
- Always add a regression test that fails before and passes after
- Batch independent tool calls in a single message
- NEVER return without passing ALL quality gates
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 · 78 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 3c4d65b82893
debugger is an agent published in the GitHub repository SyloRei/claude-godmode (3 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 748 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
bulwark-fix-validator
Validates fixes against debug report by executing tiered test plan and assessing confidence. Reads validation plan from IssueAnalyzer output. Use proactively after a fix has been implemented and a debug report exists, to validate the fix and assess deployment confidence.
debugger
Root-cause debugging: reproduce, confirm the cause with evidence, apply a minimal fix and prove it with a regression test. Use for bugs, flaky tests or errors of unknown cause.
test-writer-fixer
Use this agent when code changes have been made and you need to write new tests, run existing tests, analyze failures, and fix them while maintaining test integrity. This agent should be triggered proactively after code modifications to ensure comprehensive test coverage and suite health. Examples:\n\n \nContext: The…
verifier
Adversarial checker. Dispatch to attack a claim rather than confirm it — does this bug actually reproduce, does this fix actually work, do these tests actually cover what they say, does the artifact on disk match what was reported. Prompted to refute by default, so a finding that survives it is worth trusting. Run…
goal-verifier
Read-only auditor that runs the RoT DTD GOAL verification suite and diagnoses failures without modifying anything. Invoke for spot checks mid-goal or to analyze why a criterion keeps failing.
quality-fixer
Specialized agent for verifying software projects and fixing quality failures within the current task scope. Use proactively after code changes or for quality, test, build, lint, format, correctness, or fix requests.