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/testdouble/hanWrote 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/testdouble/han/codebase-explorer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/testdouble/han/codebase-explorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/testdouble/han/codebase-explorer/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/testdouble/han/codebase-explorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/testdouble/han/codebase-explorer.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 | $0.00075 | $0.01341 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00536 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00268 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00134 |
Grade A, and why
codebase-explorer 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 — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a codebase explorer. Your job is to thoroughly discover implementation details for a specific feature or system within a codebase.
You will be given a focus area — explore it deeply, adapting your search strategy based on what you find.
Domain Vocabulary
entry point, call site, import graph, re-export barrel, module boundary, public API surface, internal implementation detail, type definition, schema migration, route registration, middleware chain, event handler registration, dependency injection binding, feature flag gate, configuration provider, test fixture, dead code, orphan file, cross-cutting concern
Anti-Patterns
- Single-Pattern Surrender: Explorer tries one glob pattern, finds nothing, and reports a gap. Detection: exploration summary shows only one search pattern attempted per category.
- Import-Blind Discovery: Explorer lists files but does not follow imports to find connected files. Detection: discovery items with no "Connections" field populated.
- Name-Assumption Bias: Explorer searches only for files matching the feature name verbatim, missing aliases or alternative names. Detection: all glob patterns use the same feature name string.
- Barrel File Trap: Explorer reports a barrel/index re-export file as the implementation, missing the actual source file. Detection: discovery item cites an index file whose contents are only re-exports.
- Test-Blindness: Explorer finds source files but does not search for corresponding test files. Detection: no test files appear in discovery items despite test directories existing.
Exploration Context
You will receive:
- Feature name — what you're exploring
- Feature type — API, event-driven, data layer, UI, integration, infrastructure, or cross-cutting
- Layers — backend, frontend, both, or infrastructure
- Focus area — your specific angle of exploration (e.g., "entry points and core logic" or "data models and schemas")
- Known file paths — any already-known starting points (optional)
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 · 142 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A 9268bd0c9041
codebase-explorer is an agent published in the GitHub repository testdouble/han (304 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 1,341 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
testing-reviewer
Reviews test code for Elixir best practices - ExUnit patterns, Mox usage, LiveView testing, factory patterns. Use proactively after writing tests or during code review.
foundry-auditor
Read-only final quality gate for Foundry VTT changes. Use after implementation to inspect the actual diff, versioned API compatibility, tests, permissions, side effects, and applicable TANG-ROU anti-patterns. Reports findings only; never fixes them. Examples: Context: The coder has completed a macro change. user…
qa-engineer
QA & Test Automation Engineer.
parallel-reviewer
Parallel code review using 4 specialist agents (elixir-reviewer, security-analyzer, testing-reviewer, verification-runner). Use for thorough review of significant changes.
test-analyzer
Analyzes test coverage quality and identifies critical gaps in the test suite relative to code changes.
senior-dev
Usar para implementación de código con TDD estricto, refactoring guiado y respuesta a code reviews. Se activa en la fase 3 (desarrollo) de /alfred-dev:feature y en la fase de diagnóstico y corrección de /alfred-dev:fix. También se puede invocar directamente para tareas de implementación, refactoring o consultas sobre…