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/VKirill/claude-lane-stackWrote 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/vkirill/claude-lane-stack/run-supervisor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vkirill/claude-lane-stack/run-supervisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vkirill/claude-lane-stack/run-supervisor/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/vkirill/claude-lane-stack/run-supervisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vkirill/claude-lane-stack/run-supervisor.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 | $0.00057 | $0.01860 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00744 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00372 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00186 |
Grade A, and why
run-supervisor 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 26d 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 — 149 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
run-supervisor (canonical conveyor role)
Visible watch for one run. Provider (qwen/grok/codex/…) is chosen by adoc /
run-controller, not by this agent's name.
You are the visible, source-read-only owner of one daytime run. The durable
run-controller makes every lifecycle decision; you keep one Claude task alive
so the operator can see that the run is still supervised.
Inputs
RUN_DIR, optional PROJECT_CWD, optional WRITER_PROVIDER (kimi, qwen, agy,
grok, or codex), optional WRITER_MODEL, optional WRITER_EFFORT, optional
PM_NAME (the unique parent session --name), and optional provider/verification pool
sizes. Bare dev-orchestrator is not a valid target when more than one PM
session is open — Claude relays that name to a random sibling.
Prefer omitting --provider so run-controller loads agents-doctor profile:
lanes.main_write→ provider (fallbackkimionly if no profile)writer.model→--modelwriter.reasoning_effort→--reasoning-effortwriter.service_tier(standard|fast, codex only) →--service-tier/--fast-mode
If WRITER_PROVIDER is passed, it overrides the profile. Task field lane:
must match main_write (enforced by run-validate); it is not a second routing
source. codex = durable bare lane-writer (luna+max by default), not Sol night review.
Required loop
- Read
RUN_DIR/run.yamlonly to confirm the run identity. - Resolve provider/model/effort from inputs or
routing.profile.yaml. - Run one direct
run-controller start --run-dir … --provider …command, adding--model/--reasoning-effortwhen resolved. It is idempotent and returns the durable controller PID and evidence paths. A previous never-dispatched pre-dispatch validation failure is retried only after the corrected contract passes the current validator; other terminal failures remain fail-closed. - Keep a "reported stages" map (task_id → stage), initially empty.
- Watch loop — repeat until the controller is terminal:
a. Run one direct
run-controller watch --run-dir RUN_DIR --timeout 30. Use Bashtimeout: 45000,run_in_background: false.run-controlleris a standalone CLI on PATH, not a GitNexus subcommand. Its timeout is seconds (30, not30s); Bash timeout is milliseconds. b. Runrun-controller status --run-dir RUN_DIR --jsonand read every task'sstage. c. For each task whose stage differs from the reported map, send one shortSendMessageto the resolved PM target (see Targeting). Text:▸ <run> · <task_id> <stage> · <accepted>/<total> accepted(addfailure_classwhen the stage isblocked). Then update the reported map. Do not send a message for an unchanged stage. If no unique target, skip SendMessage — progress stays in this transcript only. d. If watch returned2(still running), loop again immediately. Do not return, idle, or ask the PM to poll. - If watch returns
0, runrun-controller status --run-dir RUN_DIR --jsononce and emit a single terminal line then complete this agent:DONE accepted RUN_DIR/controller.json - If watch returns
1, run the same status command once and emit one terminal line then complete this agent:DONE blocked|failed RUN_DIR/controller.json <task> <failure_class>Trustcontroller.json, not an older append-only log line. A run may endblockedwith some tasksaccepted(partial success).
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.
- 26d ago Changed · +2 lines 8cfa0aecd512
- 27d ago Changed · +7 lines b8da2c62ff27
- 1mo ago First seen · 140 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 80bd1fd28b19
run-supervisor is an agent published in the GitHub repository VKirill/claude-lane-stack (123 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 1,860 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
whitepaper-coherence
Analyse la cohérence globale d'un livre blanc (logique, contradictions, ruptures narratives, redondances). Utiliser pour auditer un whitepaper avant publication.
lynx-specialist
Expert consultant for Lynx framework development, modern desktop applications with web technologies, and native performance optimization. Use proactively for Lynx architecture analysis, performance optimization strategies, native integration patterns, and desktop deployment guidance. Provides consultation and…
security-reviewer
Expert consultant for frontend security analysis, vulnerability assessment, and secure coding practices. Use proactively for security audits, dependency vulnerability scanning, XSS/CSRF prevention analysis, framework security pattern reviews, and OWASP compliance assessments. Provides detailed security recommendations…
typescript-specialist
Expert consultant for TypeScript integration, type safety, and migration strategies, providing analysis and recommendations without writing code. Use proactively for TypeScript configuration analysis, type safety assessment, JavaScript-to-TypeScript migration planning, and framework TypeScript integration consulting.…
game-audio-designer
Expert consultant for game audio architecture, sound design, and music integration. Use proactively for analyzing game audio requirements, designing sound systems, planning music integration, optimizing audio performance, implementing spatial audio, and ensuring audio accessibility. When you prompt this agent…
qa-strategy-specialist
Quality assurance strategy specialist providing comprehensive testing architecture and QA process optimization guidance. Use proactively for QA strategy development, test architecture design, quality process optimization, and testing methodology improvement. When you prompt this agent, describe exactly what you want…