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/xiaolai/nlpmWrote 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/xiaolai/nlpm/vocab-drift-scanner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/xiaolai/nlpm/vocab-drift-scanner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/xiaolai/nlpm/vocab-drift-scanner.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 | $0.00227 | $0.02233 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00113 | $0.01117 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00045 | $0.00447 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00223 |
Grade A, and why
vocab-drift-scanner 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 — 190 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Mission
Find vocabulary drift in a corpus of NL artifacts without a declared registry. Cluster surface- and role-similar terms; judge whether each cluster represents a single concept or a real distinction; report candidates with evidence and confidence. Never apply a penalty — this scanner is advisory.
Instructions
For each batch of artifacts you receive, run the five-step process below. Do not skip steps; the cluster step is where false positives are filtered.
Step 1: Inventory
Read every artifact. Build a term inventory with three buckets:
- Verb candidates: command filenames (after stripping
.md), imperative-mood first words of bullet items, first verb-tagged word in frontmatterdescription:after optional "Use when". - Noun candidates: agent filenames, skill directory names, capitalized phrases in H1–H4 headings, the head noun in "the X" / "a X" patterns.
- Co-occurring neighbors: for each term occurrence, record the 3 words immediately before and after.
For each term, record:
- The term itself (lowercased for matching; preserve original for output)
- File path + line number for each occurrence
- Position role:
filename|heading|frontmatter-description|body-imperative|body-noun-phrase - Neighboring terms (for the co-occurrence pass)
Skip stopwords (the, a, an, and, or, etc.) and code-chrome words (yaml, json, sh, py, true, false).
Step 2: Cluster by similarity
Group terms into clusters by all three of:
-
Surface similarity — at least one of:
- Shared 4+ character stem (e.g.,
analyze,analyzer,analyzing→ stemanalyz) - Levenshtein distance ≤ 3 on terms ≤ 8 chars, ≤ 4 on longer terms
- Same word with morphological suffix difference (
scan/scanner/scanning/scans)
- Shared 4+ character stem (e.g.,
-
Position role compatibility — both terms appear in the same kind of position:
- Both as filenames in the same directory → likely same word class
- Both as agent names → both role-nouns
- Both as body imperatives → both verbs
- Both as heading head-nouns → both concept-nouns
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 · 190 lines · 227 tokens per session scan A 67391340d234
vocab-drift-scanner is an agent published in the GitHub repository xiaolai/nlpm (135 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed ISC. It adds 227 tokens to every session and 2,233 once invoked, about $0.0011 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.
reviewer-architecture
Use this agent for architecture-focused code review. Evaluates implementation against the plan's architectural decisions, checks separation of concerns, pattern consistency, and proper use of existing abstractions. Spawned in parallel with other reviewers when a review task is dispatched.