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/existential-birds/beagleWrote 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/plugins/existential-birds/beagle/beagle-elixir)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/plugins/existential-birds/beagle/beagle-elixir"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/plugins/existential-birds/beagle/beagle-elixir/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/plugins/existential-birds/beagle/beagle-elixir"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/plugins/existential-birds/beagle/beagle-elixir.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>Grade A, and why
beagle-elixir 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.
What it actually says
{
"name": "beagle-elixir",
"description": "Elixir, Phoenix, and LiveView code review and documentation skills",
"version": "1.5.0",
"author": {
"name": "Existential Birds, LLC",
"email": "[email protected]"
},
"repository": "https://github.com/existential-birds/beagle",
"keywords": [
"elixir",
"phoenix",
"liveview",
"oban",
"ecto",
"exunit",
"code-review",
"exdoc",
"documentation"
]
}
What it installs
The manifest is a name and a version. 10 skills travel with it, and installing the plugin installs all of them — 385 tokens a session between them. Each is measured on its own page, and each can be installed alone.
- Skill elixir-writing-docs A 47 tokens
- Skill exdoc-config A 40 tokens
- Skill review-elixir A 17 tokens
- Skill liveview-code-review A 40 tokens
- Skill elixir-code-review A 42 tokens
- Skill elixir-docs-review A 50 tokens
- Skill elixir-performance-review A 38 tokens
- Skill elixir-security-review A 38 tokens
- Skill exunit-code-review A 38 tokens
- Skill phoenix-code-review A 35 tokens
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 · 22 lines scan A 75490f8fb177
beagle-elixir is a plugin published in the GitHub repository existential-birds/beagle (82 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. Its token cost is not measured: this kind of file is read by the harness, not the model. 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 2026-09-16.
Other plugins, from other repositories
python-dev
Python development workflow with architecture design, coding guidelines, testing patterns, and specialized review agents.
code-review
Autonomous C#/.NET code review — fail-fast pipeline with mechanical checks + AI sub-agents (performance, architecture, correctness, UI/Blazor).
go-standards
Stdlib-grounded Go engineering standards for implementation, review, refactoring, and testing.
go-dev
Go development toolkit: 6 specialized subagents (go-structure-reviewer, go-developer, go-bug-reviewer, go-security-reviewer, go-perf-developer, go-test-developer) and a multi-phase optimization pipeline (go-optimize) for end-to-end Go code review and improvement.
django-reviewer
Reviews and refines Django/Python code for clarity, consistency, and maintainability while preserving all functionality. Applies Django best practices, PEP 8, and project standards.
go-spec-reviewer
Review Go design documents before implementation begins — catches over-engineering, missing error paths, interface misuse, and Cobra/Viper convention violations while a plan is still cheap to change.