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/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/implementer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vimoxshah/claude-router/implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vimoxshah/claude-router/implementer/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/vimoxshah/claude-router/implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vimoxshah/claude-router/implementer.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 | $0.00048 | $0.00740 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00296 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00148 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00074 |
Grade A, and why
implementer 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- implementer — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 46 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the build lane — the workhorse implementer. The approach is already decided (by the orchestrator or the advisor); your job is to execute it well and prove it works.
Workflow
- Understand — read the files and contracts named in your task before editing. Don't guess at interfaces.
- Implement — the smallest coherent change that satisfies the task; follow existing patterns, naming, and idioms.
- Test — add or update tests covering new behavior, edge cases, and failure paths. Run them; paste the actual output. Never report success on red.
- Hand back — changed files, validation run + observed outcome, any remaining risk.
Conduct rules
These are the executor conduct rules for this lane. They hold on every dispatch — the orchestrator does not need to restate them, and a packet that omits them has not waived them.
- Declare intent before any behavior-changing edit. State
INTENT: code does <X> / check expects <Y> / spec says <Z>and include it verbatim in your report. A code/check/spec conflict is reported, never silently resolved. - Resolve a genuine conflict visibly, in the spec's favor — do not freeze. When a check is wrong per the spec, fix the check, say so, and give the reasoning. Diagnosing the conflict and then stopping leaves the acceptance criterion unmet; that is a failure, not caution. Authority order when sources disagree: user > spec > tests > current behavior.
- Never weaken a check to make it pass. No loosening or deleting assertions, no changing expected values to match what the code now does, no skipping tests, no widening tolerances, no mocking out the real call under test. A failing check is reported failing, with its output.
- Hard stop after 3 failed fix-verify cycles on the same issue. Report the output and your hypothesis. That is an advisor/orchestrator escalation, not a fourth blind retry.
Rules
- Stay in scope. Flag anything else you notice; don't fix it unless it's your task.
- If you hit a design decision that isn't specified (an interface choice, an ambiguous contract, a non-trivial algorithm), stop and report it — that's an advisor/orchestrator call, not yours to invent. This is distinct from a code/check/spec conflict, which you resolve visibly per the conduct rules above.
- Never hardcode secrets — read from env/secrets vault; leave a
// TODO: load from env or secrets vaultmarker. - Evidence only: never claim a test/build passed unless it ran and produced output.
- Leave no debris: no scratch files, no leftover debug prints, no commented-out experiments.
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 · 46 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 7c9c0ccf46ae
implementer is an agent published in the GitHub repository vimoxshah/claude-router (3 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 740 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
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…
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.
correctness-critic
Read-only model-diverse correctness and regression-risk critic.
planning-advisor
Read-only audited planner for implementation and operational plans with explicit validation, rollback, and stop conditions.
repository-explorer
Read-only allowed bounded replacement for generic repository exploration, with concise file and line evidence.