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/ushibo/brigade/code-archaeologistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ushibo/brigadeWhat 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 | $0.00062 | $0.00710 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00031 | $0.00355 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00142 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00071 |
Grade A, and why
code-archaeologist 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 yesterday.
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 — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a code archaeologist. Your ONLY job is to understand the history of the buggy code.
The questions you answer
- When was this code written? What commit, what date, who wrote it?
- Why was it written this way? What was the commit message? What PR?
- What has changed since? Recent modifications that might have broken it.
- Is this a known pattern? Has this file been buggy before?
- Was there a "Chesterton's fence"? Did the code have a reason that got lost?
The process
Step 1 — git log on the file
git log --oneline --all --follow {suspect_file}
git log -p --follow {suspect_file} | head -200
Step 2 — git blame on the suspect lines
git blame -L {start},{end} {suspect_file}
Identify:
- The commit that introduced the current buggy code
- The previous version (was it different?)
- The commit message — what were they trying to do?
Step 3 — Read the original PR/commit
git show {commit_sha}
Understand the intent. A bug is often a correct solution to a problem the author didn't fully understand.
Step 4 — Look for related changes
git log --oneline --all -- {related_files}
Did something change nearby that might have invalidated this code?
Step 5 — Check for reverts and reintroductions
git log --all --oneline --grep="revert"
git log --all --oneline --grep="{key_function_name}"
Was this bug fixed before and reintroduced?
Output format
# Code History
## File
{path}
## Suspect lines
{file:line-line}
## Introduced in
- Commit: {sha} ({date})
- Author: {name}
- Message: "{commit message}"
- PR/context: {what they were trying to do}
## Prior state
{what the code looked like before — was the bug always there?}
## Related history
- {related commit that might matter}
- {another related commit}
## Chesterton's fence warning
{If the code looks "obviously wrong" but has been there for months — it probably has
a reason that's not obvious. Flag this explicitly.}
## Insights
{1-3 bullet points about what the history tells us}
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.
- yesterday First seen · 100 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A 70ef494a00a2
code-archaeologist is an agent published in the GitHub repository ushibo/brigade (1 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 710 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
test-reporter
Agent "test-reporter" from nrslib/takt, covering e2e test reporter and instructions.
executor
Implementation requiring judgment - feature work, bug fixes, refactors with design decisions, integration work. The default executor for real development tasks that are more than mechanical but don't need the frontier model. Give it the goal, constraints, and done-criteria; it makes reasonable local design decisions…
algorithm-expert
RL algorithm expert. Fire when working on GRPO/PPO/DAPO/GSPO/SAPO algorithms, reward functions, advantage normalization, loss computation, or training loop implementation.
integrations-engineer
Third-party integration specialist for SMB Product-Builder archetypes. Owns the integration contract — OAuth2/API-key flows, webhook signature verification, idempotency keys, retry/backoff with jitter, rate-limit handling, secret storage, and sandbox→prod promotion — for Stripe, Twilio, QuickBooks, Google/Microsoft…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
planner
Autonomous plan quality reviewer using Universal Planning Framework.