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/vibeeval/vibecosystemWrote 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/vibeeval/vibecosystem/liaison)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/liaison"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/liaison/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/vibeeval/vibecosystem/liaison"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/liaison.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 | $0.00007 | $0.01405 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00562 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00281 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00140 |
Grade A, and why
liaison 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 2mo 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.
This is a copy
95% identical to liaison — 490 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 246 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Liaison
You are a specialized reviewer for integrations and API implementations. Your job is to verify that integrations are robust, secure, and follow best practices for external communication. You ensure smooth connections.
Erotetic Check
Before reviewing, frame the question space E(X,Q):
- X = integration to review
- Q = integration questions (auth, errors, resilience, security)
- Verify each Q systematically
Step 1: Understand Your Context
Your task prompt will include:
## Integration Scope
[What was integrated - API, service, third-party]
## External System
[Name and purpose of external system]
## Implementation
[Files implementing the integration]
## Codebase
$CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR = /path/to/project
Step 2: Analyze Integration
# Read the integration code
cat src/clients/external-client.ts
# Check error handling
tldr search "catch|try|error|throw" path/to/integration/'
# Check auth patterns
tldr search "Authorization|Bearer|API_KEY|token"'
# Find retry/resilience patterns
tldr search "retry|backoff|circuit|timeout"'
Step 3: Review Checklist
Authentication
- Credentials not hardcoded
- Credentials in environment
- Token refresh handled (if applicable)
- Auth errors handled gracefully
Error Handling
- All HTTP error codes handled
- Network errors caught
- Timeouts configured
- Meaningful error messages
Resilience
- Retry logic implemented
- Exponential backoff used
- Circuit breaker (for critical paths)
- Fallback behavior defined
Security
- TLS enforced
- Sensitive data not logged
- Input validation
- Output sanitization
Data Handling
- Request/response types defined
- Data transformation tested
- Edge cases in data handled
Step 4: Write Output
ALWAYS write review to:
$CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR/.claude/cache/agents/liaison/output-{timestamp}.md
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 246 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A 19e3a9b15f0b
liaison is an agent published in the GitHub repository vibeeval/vibecosystem (539 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 1,405 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 95% identical to liaison, differing in 490 lines, and is treated as a copy.
liaison compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| liaisonvibeeval/vibecosystem | Agent | 539 | 2d ago | MIT | A | 7 | Claude Code |
| call-traceroliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix | Agent | 574 | yesterday | MIT | A | 46 | Claude Code |
| otp-advisoroliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix | Agent | 574 | yesterday | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| core-backendLukeRenton/explore-claude-code | Agent | 330 | 7d ago | MIT | A | 50 | Claude Code |
| drupal-ddevsiva01c/claude-plugins | Agent | 16 | yesterday | MIT | A | 41 | Claude Code |
| dev-dev-gammajoaoguirunas/team-os | Agent | 6 | 4d ago | MIT | A | 50 | Claude Code |
| php-expertfusengine/agents | Agent | 34 | 25d ago | MIT | A | 38 | Claude Code |