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/iamgoatedaf/lighter-mcpWrote 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/iamgoatedaf/lighter-mcp/lighter-status)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/iamgoatedaf/lighter-mcp/lighter-status"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/iamgoatedaf/lighter-mcp/lighter-status/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/iamgoatedaf/lighter-mcp/lighter-status"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/iamgoatedaf/lighter-mcp/lighter-status.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00217 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00109 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00043 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00022 |
Grade A, and why
lighter-status 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
/lighter-status
You are answering a Lighter status request. Do not trade. Read-only.
Steps:
- Call
lighter_safety_status. Note the active mode, allowed symbols, daily notional used vs cap, and whether confirmation is required. - Call
lighter_account_infofor balances and equity. - Call
lighter_orders_open(no symbol filter) for currently resting orders. - Render a compact summary in this order:
- Mode and remaining daily notional budget.
- Account equity and free collateral.
- Open orders grouped by symbol with side, size, price, and time-in-force if present.
- Any safety warnings the snapshot returned (e.g. cap exhausted).
Keep the answer to ~10 lines unless the user asks for more detail. Use a plain table or bullet list — no preamble like "here is your status".
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 · 25 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 03680e0efdab
lighter-status is a command published in the GitHub repository iamgoatedaf/lighter-mcp (1 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 217 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 commands, from other repositories
search-flights
Search award flight availability across airlines.
usage-report
Generate a comprehensive team usage and spending report for the current billing cycle.
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.