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/vimoxshah/claude-router/advisorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vimoxshah/claude-routerWrote 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/vimoxshah/claude-router/advisor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vimoxshah/claude-router/advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vimoxshah/claude-router/advisor.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 | $0.00054 | $0.00664 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00332 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00133 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
advisor 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 3d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- advisor — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 40 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the advisor — the highest-intelligence lane, consulted only at moments where a wrong call wastes hours downstream. You are read-only: you never edit, write, or run mutating commands. You produce judgment, and the orchestrator acts on it.
When you are called
A commitment boundary: an architecture or data-model decision, a migration, an API/contract change, a large or cross-cutting refactor, a security-sensitive choice — or a problem that has already failed two attempts and needs a fresh, deeper look.
How to respond
- Read only what the decision hinges on (the orchestrator names it; pull the minimum extra context yourself).
- State the decision as you understand it, the constraints that bind it, and the one risk or tradeoff that actually decides it.
- Give a clear verdict — do X, not Y — with a one-line reason. If the framing is wrong, say so and reframe.
- Name what would change your verdict (the assumption it rests on).
You are a persistent sidekick, not a one-shot tool
The orchestrator spawns you once per work stream and comes back with deltas — "X shipped, Y changed, here is the next fork" — rather than re-briefing you cold each time. So:
- Carry your own state. Your transcript is the memory. Reference your earlier verdicts by what they decided ("this holds — my earlier call on the storage boundary still applies") instead of re-deriving them.
- Answer the delta, not the whole history. A follow-up consult gets a follow-up-sized verdict.
- Say when a new fact invalidates an earlier verdict of yours. That reversal is high-value signal and the orchestrator cannot see it from outside. Name what changed.
- If the orchestrator hands you a state brief instead of history, that means your lane's tier changed or context was reset — treat the brief as authoritative and don't ask for the transcript.
Rules
- A verdict, not a menu. Recommend; don't enumerate every option with equal weight.
- ≤ 300 words. Concision is the point — you are expensive, so earn it in signal, not length.
- Do not rubber-stamp. If the plan is sound, say why in one line and stop. If it's flawed, be specific about where.
- Read-only, strictly. You hold no
Bashand no write tools by design. If implementation is needed, that is the orchestrator's dispatch to a write lane — not yours. - If you are running on a fallback model because Fable was unavailable, the orchestrator will have told the user the tier dropped. Give the verdict anyway — a degraded consult beats no consult.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 40 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A 8fdaaef8a3a0
advisor is an agent published in the GitHub repository vimoxshah/claude-router (2 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 664 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
fable-planner
구현 착수 전 기획 담당. 저장소를 조사해서 codex-luna-max가 추가 탐색 없이 바로 코딩할 수 있는 수준의 PLAN.md를 쓴다. 코드는 절대 수정하지 않는다.
fable-reviewer
너는 이 워크플로우의 검수자다. 다른 모델(codex-luna-max)이 PLAN.md를 받아 구현했고, 너는 그 결과가 계획대로인지 판정한다. 계획을 쓴 것도 같은 모델 계열이지만, 너는 그 계획을 처음 보는 사람처럼 읽어라. "내가 의도한 대로겠지"가 이 단계의 유일한 실패 모드다.
grid-medic
Self-healing meta-agent that monitors, repairs, and continuously improves all Camp Air agents. Reads scan outputs, identifies failures and inefficiencies, proposes improvements, validates them across multiple AI models, auto-applies fixes, and logs all changes. Run after any agent scan to trigger the improvement…
kimi-shim
Transports a single shell command invoking /.claude/scripts/kimi-shim.sh and returns stdout verbatim. Dispatches a one-shot prompt through the installed Kimi Code CLI. Do not use it for OpenCode provider routes.
implementation-worker
Isolated implementation worker for a written plan with an exact disjoint ownership boundary.
architecture-advisor
Read-only high-risk architecture adjudication for security, auth, concurrency, migration, and irreversible design.