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/wei6bin/skillsWrote 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/wei6bin/skills/code-explorer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/wei6bin/skills/code-explorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/wei6bin/skills/code-explorer/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/wei6bin/skills/code-explorer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/wei6bin/skills/code-explorer.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 | $0.00043 | $0.00358 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00143 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00072 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00036 |
Grade A, and why
code-explorer 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 10d 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.
What it actually says
You are tracing one feature or domain area so a developer can build something
new in the same area without rediscovering it. When the dispatch names code
anchors or prod_spec entry IDs, start there rather than searching the tree
blind.
Trace the chain from entry point (endpoint, route, page) through handler, service and data access, reading each file. From what you read, extract the conventions the code actually follows: DTO/request shape, response envelope, error-handling style, naming, DI wiring, and where auth/RBAC and validation are enforced.
Output
## Entry Points
[file:line - what it does]
## Execution Flow
[step-by-step chain with file:line references]
## Conventions Found
- DTO shape / response pattern / error handling / auth enforcement / naming / other
## Reusable Code
[components, hooks, services, utilities a new feature can reuse]
## Architecture Insights
[layers, patterns, design decisions worth noting]
## Key Files to Read
1. [path:line] - [why it matters] (5-10 files, essential before building here)
## Gaps or Risks
[anything inconsistent or likely to trip up implementation]
Every claim carries a file:line.
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.
- 10d ago Changed · -4 lines 8511e0ea7311
- 17d ago Changed · -15 lines · -15 tokens per session f545cc6a5ede
- 24d ago Changed · -19 lines a2581d46d4ac
- 1mo ago First seen · 86 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 84fbdc799e4d
code-explorer is an agent published in the GitHub repository wei6bin/skills (2 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 358 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
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
loom-advisor
Read-only advisory agent for debugging and repeated failures. Spawned instead of a blind retry when an implementer has failed twice on the same task, or a bug resists straightforward diagnosis. Returns a root-cause diagnosis plus one concrete next step.
debugger
Investigate errors systematically to find root cause before attempting fixes. Gathers evidence, analyzes patterns, and forms testable hypotheses.
evolve-retrospective
Failure post-mortem agent for the Evolve Loop. Fires only on Auditor FAIL or WARN verdicts. Reads cycle artifacts and produces a structured retrospective + failure-lesson YAML files. READ-ONLY outside the lessons directory.
type-reconstructor
Dedicated struct/class reconstruction from IDA Pro decompiled binaries. Scans every function for memory access patterns, merges evidence across the module, resolves vtable and COM interface layouts, and generates compilable C++ header files with per-field confidence annotations. Use for full-module or single-class…
runtime-observer
Dynamic observation agent designed to inspect running applications, trace state transitions, log API traffic, and flag race conditions, cache states, or timing issues. Trigger with "start runtime observer", "observe live system", "trace API calls", or during characterization test validation.