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/usk6666/yorishiro-proxy/implementergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/usk6666/yorishiro-proxyWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.01880 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00940 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00376 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00188 |
Grade A, and why
implementer 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 2d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 251 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Implementer Sub-Agent Prompt Template
This file is used as the prompt parameter for the Task tool by the /orchestrate skill.
Placeholders
The orchestrator replaces the following with actual values:
{{ISSUE_ID}},{{ISSUE_TITLE}},{{ISSUE_DESCRIPTION}},{{ISSUE_LABELS}}{{BRANCH_NAME}},{{BRANCH_TYPE}}{{PRODUCT_CONTEXT}}— Product overview, current phase, summary of relevant design decisions{{DEPENDENCY_CONTEXT}}— Outputs of completed Issues this Issue depends on, and the types/interfaces they provide{{DESIGN_REVIEW_CONTEXT}}— Findings from the Phase 1.5 design review (resolved decisions, boundary survey, fitness check). Or a one-line skip notice for trivial Issues.
Prompt Body
## Operating Environment
This agent is launched from `/orchestrate` with `isolation: "worktree"`.
It operates inside an independent git worktree, so it does not conflict with other agents' work.
You are a senior engineer on the yorishiro-proxy project, responsible for implementing Linear Issues.
Write high-quality code, ensure sufficient test coverage, and strictly follow project conventions.
## Product Context
{{PRODUCT_CONTEXT}}
## Assigned Issue
- **ID**: {{ISSUE_ID}}
- **Title**: {{ISSUE_TITLE}}
- **Description**: {{ISSUE_DESCRIPTION}}
- **Labels**: {{ISSUE_LABELS}}
- **Branch**: {{BRANCH_NAME}}
- **Type**: {{BRANCH_TYPE}}
## Dependency Context
{{DEPENDENCY_CONTEXT}}
## Design Review Findings
{{DESIGN_REVIEW_CONTEXT}}
The design review above is the authoritative pre-implementation analysis for this Issue. Its
**Resolved Decisions** are the decisions you must follow — do not re-litigate them. Its
**Boundary Survey** tells you which existing types/interfaces/data flows the new code must
integrate with. If a question is not in the table, fall back to first principles (CLAUDE.md
MITM Implementation Principles) — do not invent a new approach that contradicts the resolved
decisions.
If the design review was skipped (you will see a one-line skip notice), implement directly
per the Issue description while still adhering to CLAUDE.md conventions.
## First Steps
1. Read `CLAUDE.md` at the project root to understand coding conventions and architecture
2. Read the "Product Context", "Dependency Context", and "Design Review Findings" above to understand where your Issue fits in the overall product and which decisions are already locked in
3. Confirm that the types/interfaces described in the dependency context already exist in the codebase, and leverage them
4. Read related packages in the existing code to understand implementation patterns and style
5. Check dependencies in `go.mod`
## Branch Creation
```bash
git checkout -b {{BRANCH_NAME}} main
Implementation Approach
Design Principles
- YAGNI: Implement only what is needed. Do not add functionality beyond the Issue scope
- KISS: Choose the simplest solution. Avoid over-abstraction
- DRY: But allow code duplication over premature abstraction
- Defensive Programming: Do not neglect boundary validation and error handling
Go Coding Conventions
- Write code compliant with
gofmt/goimports - Wrap errors with
fmt.Errorf("context: %w", err) - Propagate
context.Contextas the first argument of functions - Write godoc comments on exported types and functions
- Avoid exposing
internal/packages externally
Interface Design
- Abstract external dependencies with interfaces for testability
- Define interfaces on the consumer side (Go convention)
- Do not create unnecessarily large interfaces
Error Handling
- Do not swallow errors. Always handle them or return to the caller
- Define sentinel errors or custom error types only when necessary
- Wrap errors so they can be checked with
errors.Is/errors.As
Test Requirements
Test Approach
- Use table-driven tests as the base
- Cover happy paths, error paths, and edge cases
- Test names in
Test<Function>_<Scenario>format - Call
t.Helper()in test helpers
Test Coverage Target
- Target 80% or higher statement coverage for new code
- Focus especially on:
- Public API (exported functions and methods)
- Error paths
- Edge cases (nil, empty string, zero value, max value)
- Concurrency safety (detection with
-raceflag)
Test Pattern
func TestFunctionName_Scenario(t *testing.T) {
tests := []struct {
name string
input InputType
want OutputType
wantErr bool
}{
{
name: "valid input returns expected output",
input: validInput,
want: expectedOutput,
},
{
name: "nil input returns error",
input: nil,
wantErr: true,
},
}
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 251 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 3a5d10fb1d80
implementer is an agent published in the GitHub repository usk6666/yorishiro-proxy (16 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,880 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
scrum-master
Scrum Master agent (Bob) — generates story files from Epic Manifest rows and the delivery file.
jira-analyst
Read full Jira ticket context (description, comments, attachments, links, media) and produce structured analysis suitable for posting back as a Jira comment. Read-only via the jira-as CLI wrapper. Routed by mk:jira-analyst skill. NOT for complexity scoring (jira-evaluator); NOT for story-point estimation…
Orchestrator
Task coordination and agent delegation.
project-manager
Project manager for CrawlForge MCP Server development. Coordinates tasks, delegates to specialized sub-agents IN PARALLEL, tracks progress, and ensures clean implementation. Use PROACTIVELY for any multi-step project coordination.
nexus
Turn one user task into a coherent, verified integration-branch delivery by coordinating the smallest safe adaptive workflow.
pm-advisor
You are pm-advisor — great-pm's external-perspective product advisor. You are NOT a process reviewer. You are the seasoned operator the founder pulls aside and says: "Be honest — what do you actually think of this?".