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/frankxai/Starlight-Intelligence-SystemWrote 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/frankxai/starlight-intelligence-system/starlight-eval)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/frankxai/starlight-intelligence-system/starlight-eval"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/frankxai/starlight-intelligence-system/starlight-eval/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/frankxai/starlight-intelligence-system/starlight-eval"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/frankxai/starlight-intelligence-system/starlight-eval.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00878 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00351 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00176 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00088 |
Grade A, and why
starlight-eval 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 — 64 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/starlight-eval
Run a Starlight Proving Ground pass — evaluate the whole Starlight Intelligence System across eight lanes, render per-lane and system verdicts with the Luminor kernel mindset, and write a scorecard receipt.
Spec: tools/proving-ground/SPEC.md · Lanes: tools/proving-ground/lanes.json
Evaluator disposition: agents/starlight-evaluator.md
Usage
/starlight-eval # full pass — all 8 lanes
/starlight-eval <lane> # single lane: model | memory | retrieval | harness | substrate | datasets | deep-reasoning | system
/starlight-eval --since <tag-or-runId> # delta against a prior scorecard
What it does
- Load
lanes.json. For each requested lane, run or read its entrypoint (compose existing infra — do NOT re-implement measurement):model→ run an arena round (tools/arena/) or read the latest receipt.memory→ runbencher.pyif corpus ≥ 50, else read lastmemory/benchmarks/.retrieval→ runtest/retrieval-eval.test.ts.harness→ runtools/run-v01-evals.mjs.substrate→ runnpm run test:substrate.datasets→ audit dataset provenance (verdict, not metric).deep-reasoning→ runnpm run eval:deep-reasoning(full four-tier lineup only; a--models/--taskssubset stamps PARTIAL and is not evidence), or read the latest receipt intools/arena/runs/.system→ synthesize lanes 1-7.
- Evaluate each lane with the Luminor kernel mindset (Precision / Wisdom /
Transcendence). Per lane: a board verdict (PROCEED / REVISE / STOP), the metrics
with
sourceLane+baseline+delta, caveats, and the named weakness the passing numbers hide (Wisdom layer — required, never omit). - Render the system verdict via the Starlight Board pressure-test
(
/starlight-board) over the composed lane results. - Write the scorecard to
tools/proving-ground/scorecards/<runId>.jsonwithranAt,nextRunDue,cadence, and theantiGoodhartwarning (R1+R2 bindings). - Attest — embed "Built on SIP" in the scorecard. If publishing, the artifact
is Board-gated before it reaches
/research.
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 Changed · +3 lines acc94df94d12
- 1mo ago First seen · 61 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 0bfc88f65609
starlight-eval is a command published in the GitHub repository frankxai/Starlight-Intelligence-System (11 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 878 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
bugfix
TDD-driven bugfix workflow: tester writes failing test (RED) → developer fixes (GREEN) → developer refactors (REFACTOR) → reviewer validates. Accepts issue number, description, or both. Asks before pushing and creating a PR; --no-pr commits locally without asking.
fix
Fix a confirmed bug: a failing regression test first, then a minimal fix, then the rest of the tdd gates.
lint-harness
Run plugin consistency checks (agent, structure, drift).
forget
Delete specific memories.
tdd
Test-driven development — write tests first, then implement minimal code to pass. Enforces red-green-refactor cycle with coverage targets.
gbu-retro
Post-session retrospective — harvest this session's lessons into durable doctrine.