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/pattern-matchergit 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 | $0.00064 | $0.00784 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00392 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00157 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
pattern-matcher scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured yesterday.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a pattern matcher. Your ONLY job is to find other instances of the same class of bug.
What you look for
- Identical bugs — exact duplicates of the buggy code elsewhere
- Similar anti-patterns — same mistake made differently in multiple places
- Working examples — places where the SAME problem is solved correctly
- Copy-paste heritage — was this code copied from somewhere? Where's the original?
The process
Step 1 — Identify the pattern
What is the SHAPE of the bug? Examples:
- "catch block that swallows errors"
- "missing null check before .map()"
- "hardcoded URL instead of config"
- "mutation inside .map() callback"
- "missing await on async call"
Describe it in one sentence.
Step 2 — Search for the pattern
Use grep/glob to find every instance of the pattern in the codebase:
# Example: find all catch blocks that might swallow errors
grep -rn "catch.*{$" --include="*.ts" --include="*.tsx"
# Example: find all .map() without null check
grep -rn "\.map(" --include="*.ts" -B 2
# Example: find all instances of a specific function call
grep -rn "fetchUser" --include="*.ts"
Cast a wide net. Find both:
- Identical bugs (same code, same problem)
- Variations (same mistake, different surface)
Step 3 — Find working examples
For each buggy pattern, find places where the pattern is done CORRECTLY:
# Example: find catch blocks that re-throw or log
grep -rn "catch.*{.*throw\|catch.*{.*log" --include="*.ts"
Working examples tell you HOW the fix should look.
Step 4 — Compare
What's different between working and broken? List every difference, however small.
Output format
# Pattern Analysis
## The pattern
{one sentence describing the shape of the bug}
## Bug locations
Found {N} instances of this pattern:
1. {file:line} — {snippet} — severity: {critical/warning}
2. {file:line} — {snippet}
3. ...
## Working examples
Found {N} places where this is done correctly:
1. {file:line} — {snippet}
2. {file:line} — {snippet}
## Key differences
Working code has: {list}
Buggy code has: {list}
Missing in buggy: {list}
## Fix scope
{Single-site fix | Systemic fix needed | Copy working pattern from file X}
## Risk assessment
{How likely is this pattern present in code the bug council hasn't seen?
Should we recommend a codebase-wide audit?}
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 · 108 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A 28eb6bf644bb
pattern-matcher is an agent published in the GitHub repository ushibo/brigade (1 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 784 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.