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/vibe-marketer/plugins-and-skills/comparatorgit 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.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00251 | $0.01257 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00125 | $0.00629 |
| Sonnet 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 4d 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.
- 4d 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 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 251 tokens to every session and 1,257 once invoked, about $0.0013 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.