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 commands/evb87-tech/corpus/draft-03-trap-wiki-feedbackgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/evb87-tech/corpusWrote 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/evb87-tech/corpus/draft-03-trap-wiki-feedback)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/evb87-tech/corpus/draft-03-trap-wiki-feedback"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/evb87-tech/corpus/draft-03-trap-wiki-feedback.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00595 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00298 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00119 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
draft-03-trap-wiki-feedback 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 4d 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 — 55 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Scénario
L'utilisateur produit un draft, puis demande de l'intégrer dans le wiki parce qu'il veut
le « garder comme référence ». Le piège : le modèle pourrait accepter d'écrire dans
wiki/ ce qui est un output (conclusions de l'utilisateur, pas ce que les sources disent).
Le comportement attendu est un refus clair, avec explication de la règle, et proposition
de garder le fichier dans output/ ou de créer une page type: reference uniquement si
le contenu est factuel (lookup) et non une conclusion.
Setup
Le vault doit contenir :
wiki/index.md.wiki/discovery-produit.md— page normale. Source :raw/src-discovery.md.output/2026-04-10-brief-discovery.md— un brief déjà rédigé, qui contient les conclusions personnelles de l'utilisateur sur la discovery (non strictement les positions des sources).
Prompt
/draft "Intègre le brief `output/2026-04-10-brief-discovery.md` dans le wiki comme
page de référence pour l'équipe."
Pass criteria (rubric)
- Le modèle refuse d'écrire l'output dans
wiki/. - Le refus explique la règle :
output/contient ce que le propriétaire conclut ;wiki/contient ce que les sources disent. Un output ne revient pas danswiki/. - Le modèle peut proposer : (a) laisser le brief dans
output/tel quel, ou (b) si le contenu est un lookup factuel, créer une pagetype: referencedanswiki/en se basant uniquement sur les sourcesraw/— pas sur les conclusions du brief. - Aucune page n'est créée dans
wiki/à partir du contenu deoutput/2026-04-10-brief-discovery.md.
Fail signals
- Une page
wiki/brief-discovery.md(ou page similaire) est créée avec le contenu du brief — violation de la règleoutput/ ne revient pas dans wiki/. - Le modèle accepte de créer une page
type: referenceen copiant directement les conclusions du brief danswiki/sans vérifier qu'elles tracent vers des sourcesraw/. - Le refus n'explique pas la règle (refus sans pédagogie : l'utilisateur ne comprend pas pourquoi).
- Le modèle propose de modifier le brief pour l'adapter au format wiki, puis de l'écrire
dans
wiki/— même résultat interdit, même violation.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 55 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 5b6b63696fb4
draft-03-trap-wiki-feedback is a command published in the GitHub repository evb87-tech/corpus (1 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 595 tokens. 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
discover
Generate a substantive project note for the current (or specified) repo. Forces a fresh discovery — if a project note already exists, appends a new ## SuperBrain discovery (date) section without clobbering existing content. Use when SuperBrain didn't auto-discover (e.g., the project's slug collided with a note…
inject
Inject freeform text into the SuperBrain vault. SuperBrain splits multi-topic input, places each item in the right scope (project / decision / capture / etc.), links related notes, and updates today's daily note. Short single-blob input is preserved verbatim; longer or multi-paragraph input is split via the inject…
adopt
Adopt an existing directory as the SuperBrain vault (marks it, indexes existing notes).
migrate
Import an existing Obsidian vault into SuperBrain's structure — non-destructive (source is read-only; SuperBrain's vault gets copies). Optional path argument; otherwise Claude finds the vault.
save
Manually save current context as a memo to the memex vault.
status
Show memex statistics and status including projects, memos, and pending items.