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.
npx agentmods add agents/tacoda/keystone/keystone-quality-radargit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tacoda/keystoneWrote 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/tacoda/keystone/keystone-quality-radar)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/tacoda/keystone/keystone-quality-radar"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tacoda/keystone/keystone-quality-radar.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00555 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00278 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00111 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00056 |
Grade A, and why
keystone-quality-radar 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.
This is a copy
97% identical to quality-radar — 7 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 31 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Sensor: quality-radar
Aggregates verification and review sensors into a five-dimension scorecard for the current diff (or the whole codebase, on audit).
- Trigger — audit (codebase-wide) and review (diff-scoped).
- Inputs — outputs of lint, type-check, test, coverage, review-security, review-functional, plus complexity metrics from risk-fingerprint.
- Exit condition — every dimension has a score and at least one cited finding (or an explicit "no findings").
- Output — one score per dimension (
green | yellow | red) with the citations that drove the score. - State writes — proposes a diff to
corpus/state/quality-radar.md. User accepts or edits.
Dimensions
| Dimension | Driven by | Green | Yellow | Red |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type safety | type-check exit + signature churn |
no errors | errors confined to one region | errors across regions or any/unknown proliferation |
| Test quality | test exit + coverage + test-to-code ratio in diff |
passes; coverage stable or up; new code tested | passes; coverage flat with new code | failures, coverage drop, or new code untested |
| Readability | lint + complexity from risk-fingerprint |
lint clean; no new critical-complexity regions | lint warns; one new high-complexity region | lint errors or multiple new critical regions |
| Security | review-security findings |
none | low-severity only | medium or higher |
| Performance | hot-path heuristics from review-functional + diff size on perf-critical regions (flagged in CODEBASE_STATE.md) |
no perf-critical touch or no concerns | perf-critical touch, no benchmarks | perf-critical touch with regression signal |
Not a gate
This is a scorecard, not a verification gate. Red on a dimension is a signal to discuss, not an automatic block — the review action decides what to do with it. The actual block is whatever the underlying sensor already imposes (a failed test blocks regardless of how the radar shades the diff).
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 · 31 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 4ab04a645e16
keystone-quality-radar is an agent published in the GitHub repository tacoda/keystone (44 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 555 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to quality-radar, differing in 7 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.