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/Dragoon0x/canonWrote 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/commands/dragoon0x/canon/harden)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/dragoon0x/canon/harden"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/dragoon0x/canon/harden/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/commands/dragoon0x/canon/harden"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/dragoon0x/canon/harden.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 | $0.00046 | $0.00571 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00228 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00114 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00057 |
Grade A, and why
harden 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/harden
Every interface has 4 states. Most ship 1. Harden fills in the other 3.
Coverage map
For every data-driven view in the app, confirm:
Loading
- 400ms delay before any spinner
- Skeleton if content shape is known
- Spinner animates at 1000–1500ms per cycle
- Label changes to present-continuous on the triggering button ("Saving…")
- Fixed button width prevents layout shift
Empty
- First-time empty: illustration + headline + description + primary CTA
- User-cleared empty: brief confirmation
- Filtered empty: "No results" + "Clear filters" escape
- Search empty: "No results for X" + alternative suggestions
Error
- Network error: retry button + calm tone
- Server error: "Something went wrong" + retry + support link
- 404: friendly explanation + home link
- 403: sign-in prompt or request-access flow
- Validation: inline at the field, specific cause, how to fix
Populated (the happy path)
- Already designed. Just verify it degrades gracefully at low data volumes (1 item) and high (1000 items).
Network resilience
- Offline banner if app requires network
- Queue mutations during offline; sync on reconnect
- Toast confirmation on reconnect: "Back online. Synced N changes."
- Read-only mode for cached views when network is gone
Slow-network UX
Simulate 3G and check:
- Is LCP < 2.5s on 75th percentile mobile?
- Does the page render progressively or wait for everything?
- Are fonts using
font-display: swapso text appears immediately? - Is the LCP image preloaded with
fetchpriority="high"?
Destructive actions
- Prefer Undo toast (5s window) over confirmation dialog
- Irreversible actions get explicit dialog with action verb: "Delete forever"
- Destructive button styled as such: red background or outlined-red
- Keyboard focus lands on the safe default (Cancel), not the destructive button
Copy hardening
- Every error has recovery action text
- Every empty state has next-step CTA
- Every loading state identifies what's loading (when > 1s)
- Every success state is brief and non-blocking (toast, not dialog)
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 · 69 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 0179194de90c
harden is a command published in the GitHub repository Dragoon0x/canon (6 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 571 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 commands, from other repositories
debug
Systematic debugging with hypotheses and evidence gathering.
improve
/improve Scan and fix all improvement categories /improve arch Architectural improvements only /improve duplication Duplicate code / abstraction consolidation /improve quality Code quality (GuardLoop patterns GL-01 through GL-10) /improve security Security posture improvements /improve --dry-run Show what would be…
detectar-ambiguedad
Detectar ambigüedades y contradicciones en specs de forma exhaustiva.
doctor
Diagnosticar y reparar problemas del framework Don Cheli, git y entorno. Usa cuando el usuario dice "doctor", "problemas del framework", "don cheli no funciona", "repair Don Cheli", "debug setup", "setup broken", "framework broken", "reparar entorno". Detecta y repara issues de configuración, git y dependencias…
diagnostico
Verificar la salud del setup de Don Cheli en el proyecto actual.
code-locate
Locate code paths and line ranges for a described behavior: up to 10 candidates with HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW confidence and a search trail, plus a proposed SOURCEOFTRUTH.md update. Use when the first question is where one specific behavior lives and paths are unknown. Do not use when paths are explicit, the codebase is tiny…