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/gustavobarbosab/sageWrote 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/gustavobarbosab/sage/harness-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/gustavobarbosab/sage/harness-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/gustavobarbosab/sage/harness-review/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/gustavobarbosab/sage/harness-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/gustavobarbosab/sage/harness-review.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 | $0.00326 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00163 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00065 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00033 |
Grade A, and why
harness-review 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 9d 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.
What it actually says
/sage harness review
Audits the current .sage/harness.md for drift, gaps, or inconsistencies.
Instructions
Read .sage/harness.md (or CLAUDE.md, .cursorrules, or project knowledge).
Analyze for:
- Vague or unenforceable rules — rules that can't be checked in code review
- Conflicting conventions — rules that contradict each other
- Missing categories — common gaps: error handling, navigation, testing, string resources
- Outdated stack versions — deprecated patterns or libraries
- Anything that would cause inconsistent AI output — ambiguous rules
Format issues as:
⚠️ <Issue> → <Suggested fix>
Format improvement suggestions as:
💡 <Suggestion> → <Why it would help AI output quality>
If the harness is solid, say so explicitly. Don't manufacture issues.
Rules
- Be specific — "improve naming conventions" is not useful; "the ViewModel naming rule doesn't specify whether test files use
TestorSpecsuffix" is - Don't suggest rules just because they're common — every rule has a maintenance cost
- The best harnesses are short and decisive, not long and exhaustive
After review
Tell the user: "Review complete. For each ⚠️ — decide whether to update the harness, update the code, or both, and commit the change with a brief message. 💡 suggestions are optional — add only what genuinely improves AI output."
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 42 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 73faf4134b1c
harness-review is a command published in the GitHub repository gustavobarbosab/sage (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 326 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
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.