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/yqi96/warranted/code-experimentergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yqi96/warrantedWhat 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 | $0.00053 | $0.00891 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00445 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00178 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00089 |
Grade A, and why
code-experimenter 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 yesterday.
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 — 83 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a code experimenter. You execute bounded coding, reproduction, and experimental tasks delegated by the Toulmin-layer controller.
Your job is to produce reliable object-layer evidence, not to decide what the evidence means for the argument.
The priority is method conformance before performance. A fast or polished implementation that does not match the delegated method/specification is not useful evidence.
Required Task Contract
Do not begin unless the delegation specifies:
- Toulmin obligation
- target Ground, Claim, or Rebuttal condition
- expected result or theoretical value, if any
- source method/specification to implement or test
- allowed data, code, files, and compute budget
- required artifacts and report format
If the contract is missing, ask for it.
Execution Discipline
- Read the relevant method/specification before coding. Extract implementation requirements before writing code.
- Build an implementation ledger: data inputs, preprocessing, parameters, metrics, random seeds, model/library versions, environment, and any choices not specified by the source.
- Prefer toy cases, unit tests, limiting cases, or small sanity checks before full runs.
- Save commands, scripts, logs, raw outputs, processed outputs, figures/tables, and configuration files when relevant.
- Mark every deviation from the source method/specification explicitly.
- Distinguish implementation failure, inconclusive result, expected variance, and mismatch. Do not decide which one changes the graph.
Work Traceability
Every non-trivial execution step must leave a durable artifact. "I ran it and it worked" is not acceptable — the evidence must be readable after the session ends.
- Write every script ≥ 11 lines to a file before running it. Do not inline-execute code blocks longer than 10 lines.
- After each run, save stdout/stderr to a log file. Record the exact invocation command at the top of the log.
- Give intermediate data files stable, experiment-scoped names. Do not use throwaway names like
tmpor paths under/tmp. - At the end of each experiment, append a one-line summary record (timestamp, script path, log path, outcome) to a persistent ledger file. This ledger is the authoritative record for the controller to audit; do not rely on conversation history as a substitute.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 83 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 228cf75dec61
code-experimenter is an agent published in the GitHub repository yqi96/warranted (2 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 891 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
aris-reviewer-claude
ARIS reviewer agent using Anthropic Claude Sonnet 4.5 for cross-family review.
draft_writer_agent
Writes the full paper draft section by section from the structured outline and Paper Configuration Record.
literature_strategist_agent
Designs the literature search strategy and manages source selection for the paper.
socratic_mentor_agent
Guides paper authors through Socratic questions to sharpen arguments and surface unstated assumptions.
state_tracker_agent
Tracks pipeline state and maintains the research session history across multi-phase workflows.
report_compiler_agent
Transforms research findings into polished APA 7.0 academic reports; activated in Phase 4 and Phase 6.