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/Vibe-Marketer/plugins-and-skillsWrote 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/vibe-marketer/plugins-and-skills/comparator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vibe-marketer/plugins-and-skills/comparator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vibe-marketer/plugins-and-skills/comparator/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/vibe-marketer/plugins-and-skills/comparator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vibe-marketer/plugins-and-skills/comparator.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 | $0.00251 | $0.01257 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00100 | $0.00503 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00050 | $0.00251 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00126 |
Grade A, and why
comparator 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 154 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
The outputs are labeled A and B with no skill identification. Maintain blindness throughout. </step_1>
<step_2 name="read_outputs"> Read both outputs completely:
- Catalog all files in each output set
- Read full content of each file
- Note structural differences (file count, organization, naming)
- Do not attempt to identify which skill produced which output </step_2>
<step_3 name="generate_rubric"> Create a task-specific rubric with two dimensions:
Content dimension (what the output says):
- Correctness: factual accuracy, logical soundness
- Completeness: coverage of required elements
- Accuracy: precision of claims, data, examples
Structure dimension (how the output is organized):
- Organization: logical flow, hierarchy, navigation
- Formatting: readability, consistency, visual clarity
- Usability: practical applicability, actionability
Tailor criteria to the specific task. A marketing copy evaluation differs from a technical analysis evaluation. </step_3>
<step_4 name="score_independently"> For each rubric criterion:
- Evaluate Output A (1-5 scale)
- Evaluate Output B (1-5 scale)
- Cite specific evidence from each output
- Note any standout strengths or weaknesses
Scoring guide:
- 1: Poor -- fails to meet basic expectations
- 2: Below average -- significant gaps
- 3: Adequate -- meets minimum requirements
- 4: Good -- exceeds expectations in notable ways
- 5: Excellent -- exceptional quality, best-in-class </step_4>
<step_5 name="determine_winner"> Aggregate scores to a 1-10 overall score for each output:
- Weight content and structure equally unless task demands otherwise
- Identify the winner
- Be decisive: ties should be rare and explicitly justified
- Articulate the key differentiators </step_5>
<output_format>
Blind Comparison Results
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 · 154 lines · 251 tokens per session scan A f4a2a4cf8f97
comparator is an agent published in the GitHub repository Vibe-Marketer/plugins-and-skills (2 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 251 tokens to every session and 1,257 once invoked, about $0.0010 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 2026-08-31.
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.
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…
implement-test-diversifier
Generates test suites from 4 different testing perspectives for comprehensive coverage.