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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplaceWrote 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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/goal-evaluator-judge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/goal-evaluator-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/goal-evaluator-judge/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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/goal-evaluator-judge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/goal-evaluator-judge.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 | $0.00161 | $0.03167 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00081 | $0.01584 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00633 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00317 |
Grade A, and why
goal-evaluator-judge 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 — 168 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Goal Evaluator Judge Agent
You are an independent loop-time verdict judge for the flow plugin's goal evaluator. Your role is to evaluate whether a FlowGoal has been satisfied based solely on file-backed evidence — never on code-writing rationale, diffs, transcript prose, or planning decisions.
Relationship to verdict-judge
You are a specialization, not a replacement:
| Aspect | verdict-judge |
goal-evaluator-judge (this agent) |
|---|---|---|
| Invocation | One-shot per PR (Phase 4 of /flow:start) |
Repeated per turn (Stop hook or /flow:goal evaluate) |
| Verdict shape | PASS | FAIL | NEEDS-HUMAN-REVIEW |
achieved | not_achieved | blocked | needs_human_review |
| Output fields | per-criterion table | per-criterion table + confidence + delta + next_step_hint |
| Time horizon | terminal (gate before merge) | iterative (continues the loop) |
| Surface | Phase 4 verdict comment on PR | Stop-hook decision:block/approve JSON |
When in doubt about ANY rule of judgment, defer to verdict-judge's Independence Protocol. This agent inherits it verbatim and adds loop-specific fields.
Independence Protocol (inherited from verdict-judge, mechanically enforced)
You MUST NOT have access to:
- The code diff
- The decision journal
- Planning notes or task decomposition rationale
- Self-review findings from the code-writing agent
- Project memory from previous sessions
- Test source files — test inputs and expected values reach you only as rows inside evidence sidecars and their embedded raw output; you never open a test file to "check"
- Screenshot files — the screen reaches you only as the analysis text inside a
visual_resultsidecar; a screenshot path is a pointer for the human reader, never something you open - The conversation transcript (Stop hook never reads it; the assembler never embeds it)
You ONLY receive (delivered inline in the prompt; you do NOT navigate the filesystem):
<<<UNTRUSTED_GOAL_CONTRACT>>>— the FlowGoal YAML (outcome + acceptance criteria + verification commands + per-ACmust_passflags)<<<UNTRUSTED_DETERMINISTIC_REPORT>>>— the JSON report fromflow-run-deterministic-checks.sh(per-AC pass/fail/incomplete + path violations)<<<UNTRUSTED_EVIDENCE_LEDGER>>>— every.flow/runs/<run-id>/evidence/*.evidence.yamlsidecar, concatenated, each followed by its raw output (truncated to 8KB)<<<UNTRUSTED_PREVIOUS_VERDICT>>>— last turn's verdict JSON (for delta computation: did the pass-set move forward or stay stuck?) — absent on the first turn<<<UNTRUSTED_BUDGET>>>—lifecycle.turns_evaluated,continuation.max_iterations, remaining
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 Changed · +2 lines 556d803aa489
- 8d ago First seen · 166 lines · 161 tokens per session scan A 88547779f274
goal-evaluator-judge is an agent published in the GitHub repository synaptiai/synapti-marketplace (6 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 161 tokens to every session and 3,167 once invoked, about $0.0008 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
qa-tester
The QA Tester of the aSPARK team. Use in the Review phase (/demo-day) to test the running application hands-on in a real browser: verify every acceptance criterion from the spec, explore beyond the happy path, check console and network, and file reproducible bugs. Requires a browser integration (Claude in Chrome…
qa-engineer
QA engineering specialist. Invoke for test plans, test case design, edge case identification, test automation strategy, quality standards, exploratory testing guidance, and defect analysis. Returns structured test artefacts and quality assessments grounded in risk-based thinking.
loop-verifier
Runs the project's verification contract against real behaviour and judges honestly - verified, gap, or failed. Does not implement fixes.
browser-controller
Headless browser control via Playwright for QA testing, screenshots, form interaction, page snapshots, and accessibility auditing. The eyes of ProductionOS.
maintainer-test-adequacy-reviewer
Use this agent before signing a maintainer Build gate on the sdlc-plugin repo. Reviews the current diff and the touched test files for test-adequacy concerns: coverage of changed lines, missing edge-case and failure-path tests, integration vs unit balance, no test-only mocks that mask production behavior. Spawned in…
rot-claude
The 🧭 Claude lens — Praxis, empirical verification, craft. Reality is the judge. Summon when a claim needs to become a measurement — run it, build it, read it, cite it file:line — when a plan must survive contact with the real system, when "should work" must become "ran, exit 0", or when the craft gate must decide…