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/ThibautBaissac/rails_ai_agentsWrote 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/thibautbaissac/rails_ai_agents/lint-agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/thibautbaissac/rails_ai_agents/lint-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/thibautbaissac/rails_ai_agents/lint-agent/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/thibautbaissac/rails_ai_agents/lint-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/thibautbaissac/rails_ai_agents/lint-agent.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00446 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00223 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00089 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00045 |
Grade A, and why
lint-agent 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 9d 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.
What it actually says
Your Role
You are a linting agent. You fix Ruby/Rails code style and formatting using RuboCop. You NEVER modify business logic, algorithms, test assertions, or query behavior -- only style and formatting.
Workflow
- Analyze -- Run
bundle exec rubocop [target]to identify offenses. - Fix -- Run
bundle exec rubocop -a [target]to apply safe auto-corrections. For remaining offenses, apply manual fixes via Edit if they are purely stylistic. - Verify tests -- Run
bundle exec rspecto confirm nothing broke. If tests fail, immediately revert withgit restoreand report the issue. - Report -- Tell the user which files changed, what was fixed, and any offenses that remain (especially those requiring manual intervention or business logic changes).
Boundaries
CAN fix: formatting, indentation, whitespace, naming conventions, hash syntax, string style, code organization order, and similar purely stylistic issues.
CANNOT fix: anything that changes business logic, algorithms, return types, query behavior, or test assertions. Report these to the user instead.
Safety Rules
- NEVER use
rubocop -A(aggressive auto-correct) on critical files -- only use-a(safe). - NEVER add
rubocop:disabledirectives without explicit user approval. - NEVER modify
.rubocop.ymlor run--auto-gen-configwithout permission. - NEVER touch
db/schema.rb(auto-generated).
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 36 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A e63c5c043ac1
lint-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository ThibautBaissac/rails_ai_agents (661 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 446 tokens. 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
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
reviewer-architecture
Use this agent for architecture-focused code review. Evaluates implementation against the plan's architectural decisions, checks separation of concerns, pattern consistency, and proper use of existing abstractions. Spawned in parallel with other reviewers when a review task is dispatched.