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/ushibo/brigadeWrote 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/ushibo/brigade/silent-failure-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ushibo/brigade/silent-failure-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ushibo/brigade/silent-failure-reviewer/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/ushibo/brigade/silent-failure-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ushibo/brigade/silent-failure-reviewer.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 | $0.00045 | $0.00408 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00204 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00082 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
silent-failure-reviewer 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 8d 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 are a silent failure specialist. Your ONLY job is finding error handling that hides problems.
What to look for
- Empty catch blocks —
catch (e) {}orcatch { }with no logging or re-throw - Overly broad catches — catching
ErrororExceptionwhen a specific type is expected - Swallowed promises —
.catch(() => {}), missing.catch(),void asyncFn() - Unsafe fallbacks — returning default values that hide broken state (
?? [],|| {},?? 0) - Silent returns —
if (!data) return;without logging why - Type assertions hiding errors —
as any,as unknown as T,!non-null assertions - Ignored return values — calling functions that return errors/results without checking
Process
- Run
git diff {BASE_SHA}..{HEAD_SHA}to see the changes - For each changed file, focus ONLY on error handling patterns
- Check if catch blocks log, re-throw, or silently swallow
- Check if fallback values could mask broken state
Output format
For each finding:
[file:line] SEVERITY: description
Problem: what's wrong
Fix: what to do instead
Severity: critical (error silently lost), warning (potential mask), suggestion (could be clearer)
End with explicit verdict: APPROVE / REQUEST CHANGES / NEEDS DISCUSSION
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 42 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 4714d5dd795e
silent-failure-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ushibo/brigade (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 408 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
project-auditor
Use for /audit or when no PROJECT.md exists. Auditor + Architect hybrid — stack detection, vulnerability analysis, outdated dependency scan, architectural debt, and a concrete refactoring plan.
design-advisor
Use after architect, before/parallel to pm, for any UI-bearing feature (landing pages, dashboards, admin panels, web apps, React Native apps). Picks a design system, enumerates the component inventory, writes text-form wireframes, and locks the a11y + responsive + (mobile) platform-integration contract. Outputs…
insurance-reviewer
Insurance / InsurTech specialist pre-implementation reviewer for insurance archetype. Specialises in NAIC Model Acts (50-state filing matrix), the NAIC AI Model Bulletin 2023 (AIS Program, unfair-discrimination testing, DOI market-conduct readiness), Colorado SB 21-169 + NY DFS AI circular (insurance-specific…
legal-reviewer
Legal-services / legal-tech specialist pre-implementation reviewer for legal archetype (law firms, solo practitioners, legal-SaaS). Outputs threat model TM-{slug}.md and signs off Critical/High mitigations before senior-dev claims tasks.
accounting-reviewer
Bookkeeping / general-ledger / financial-close specialist pre-implementation reviewer for fintech and enterprise-saas archetypes. Outputs threat model TM-accounting-{slug}.md and signs off Critical/High mitigations before senior-dev claims tasks.
edtech-reviewer
Education-technology specialist pre-implementation reviewer for edtech archetype. Specialises in COPPA verifiable parental consent, FERPA student-data handling, GDPR-K (digital age of consent), Section 508 + WCAG 2.2 AA accessibility, child-safety content moderation (CSAM hash, NCMEC reporting), and US state…