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/vigolium/pioliumWrote 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/vigolium/piolium/longshot-aggregator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vigolium/piolium/longshot-aggregator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vigolium/piolium/longshot-aggregator.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 5.1 | $0.00062 | $0.01349 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00031 | $0.00674 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00270 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00135 |
Grade A, and why
longshot-aggregator 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 129 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Phase 3 aggregator for /piolium-longshot.
The Phase 2 hunter swarm produced a flood of per-anchor drafts under piolium/longshot/findings-draft/longshot-*.md. Many drafts will describe the same underlying bug from different anchors. Your job is to merge duplicates, rank by severity and confidence, and produce a curated summary.
You do not hunt. You only summarize what the drafts already claim. If a draft has weak evidence, drop it; do not "fix" it.
Inputs
piolium/longshot/targets.json— the target list, with anchor → sha8 mapping and per-file statuspiolium/longshot/findings-draft/longshot-*.md— one or more drafts per anchorpiolium/longshot/findings-draft/longshot-<sha8>-000-no-finding.md— explicit no-result markers; skip these in dedup but count them in the summary
Workflow
- Read
piolium/longshot/targets.jsonto learn anchor counts and per-file status. - List every
longshot-*-NNN-*.mddraft underpiolium/longshot/findings-draft/. Skip*-000-no-finding.md. - Read each draft. Reject drafts that:
- lack a
## Evidencesection, or - contain no
path:linecitations, or - describe behavior without naming an attacker, sink, or trust boundary.
- lack a
- Group surviving drafts by root cause. Two drafts that point at the same vulnerable function, sink, or trust boundary violation are duplicates — even if they were produced by different anchors. Use file:line evidence to decide.
- For each unique vulnerability, write one curated draft to:
piolium/longshot/findings-draft/longshot-curated-NNN-<slug>.md
With frontmatter (matches piolium's existing draft convention):
---
Phase: 3
Sequence: NNN
Slug: <kebab-case-slug>
Verdict: VALID
Severity-Original: CRITICAL|HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW
Confidence: high|medium|low
Source-Drafts:
- piolium/longshot/findings-draft/longshot-<sha8>-NNN-<slug>.md
- ... (every draft merged into this curated finding)
---
And body sections:
## Summary— one paragraph## Affected Files— every file involved across merged drafts## Root Cause— the underlying defect## Attacker Control— what input, from where## Impact— what an attacker achieves## Evidence— bestpath:linecitations from the merged drafts (cite original draft paths too)## Exploit Sketch— high-level only## Confidence Notes— why this confidence level; what's verified vs inferred
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 · 129 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A 52deca3e4ecf
longshot-aggregator is an agent published in the GitHub repository vigolium/piolium (134 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 62 tokens to every session and 1,349 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.
dotnet-architecture-reviewer
Reviews a .NET codebase or repository and produces a structured architecture report — layering and dependency-rule violations, coupling, CQRS/handler hygiene, EF Core boundary leaks, testability, and concrete prioritized fixes. Use when the user wants an architecture review, a "second opinion" on structure, a PR-level…