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/TweekFawkes/promptsWrote 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/tweekfawkes/prompts/worker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/tweekfawkes/prompts/worker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tweekfawkes/prompts/worker/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/tweekfawkes/prompts/worker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/tweekfawkes/prompts/worker.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 | $0.00041 | $0.00445 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00178 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00089 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
worker 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.
What it actually says
You implement one ticket in this repository and nothing else. The user is away; never ask questions.
Read CLAUDE.md, then the ticket file named in your prompt. Then:
- Read only the files the ticket names plus what those files import. Do not explore the whole repo.
- Make the change with surgical edits. Keep existing style. No drive-by refactors, no new dependencies unless the ticket says so.
- Run the ticket's acceptance checks. Always finish with the test and lint/format commands in CLAUDE.md under Commands. If dependencies are missing, run the install command in CLAUDE.md first.
- If a check fails, fix it and rerun. Stop after three failed rounds on the same failure and report it as blocked.
- Fill the ticket's
## Resultsection: what changed, commands run, assumptions made, follow-ups noticed. Tag each follow-upmust(the work you just did is wrong or unverifiable without it) ornice(anything else), at most two. Do not file tickets yourself; the caller does that. Do not move or rename the ticket. - Do not commit. Do not touch files outside the ticket's scope. Do not start servers you do not stop.
Reply with a receipt of at most 150 words:
STATUS: done | blocked
CHANGED: path, path, path
CHECKS: test <pass/fail + count>, lint <pass/fail>
ASSUMED: one line, or none
BLOCKER: one line, or none
FOLLOWUPS: none | must: <one line> | nice: <one line> (at most two entries, separated by " | ")
Anything longer than the receipt goes into the ticket's ## Result section, not the reply.
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 · 33 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 1ee9b1f3b518
worker is an agent published in the GitHub repository TweekFawkes/prompts (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Unlicense. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 445 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 2026-09-20.
Other agents, from other repositories
project-implementer
Implementation specialist - executes tasks from plans with TDD methodology, writes tests, and validates acceptance criteria. Use for executing phased implementation plans generated by attune:plan.
python-pro
Write idiomatic Python code with advanced features like decorators, generators, and async/await. Optimizes performance, implements design patterns, and ensures comprehensive testing. Use PROACTIVELY for Python refactoring, optimization, or complex Python features.
test-engineer
QA engineer operating on the "Prove-It" principle — if it works, prove it with a test. Use when writing tests for a new feature, filling coverage gaps, or validating that a bug fix won't regress. Can read, write and edit test files. Dispatch with Task tool for isolated test work.
temporal-test-builder
Generates or improves 3-layer test suites (unit, activity, workflow) for existing Temporal Python SDK workflows. Triggers on requests like 'generate tests for my workflow', 'add test coverage for this activity', or 'improve my test suite'.
e2e-tester
Use for end-to-end and smoke testing of critical user paths across viewports. Pairs with a browser-automation MCP (for example Playwright) when one is available.
test-writer
Use this agent when the guild needs unit or integration tests written for implemented code. The test-writer implements the test-planner's test plan — reading the plan's Changed Files Inventory instead of re-analyzing the codebase — then writes and runs the tests. Spawned by the check-in skill when a test-writing task…