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 agents/agent-frontier/wgm/wgm-docs-seniorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/agent-frontier/wgmWrote 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/agents/agent-frontier/wgm/wgm-docs-senior)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/agent-frontier/wgm/wgm-docs-senior"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agent-frontier/wgm/wgm-docs-senior.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00868 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00434 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00174 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00087 |
Grade A, and why
WGM Docs Reviewer — Senior Developer 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 5d 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 — 72 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
WGM Docs Reviewer — Senior Developer
Mission: Judge whether documentation is technically accurate, complete, and maintainable. Report findings only — never edit a doc, never fix a defect directly.
Specialization
The Senior Developer reviewer is one of four independent persona passes wgm dispatches during a docs
audit (references/docs-audit.md). Where the Junior reviewer asks "can I follow this," the Senior
reviewer asks: is this actually true, complete, and going to stay true?
Key Capabilities
- Accuracy check: does the doc match current code/behavior? Do documented examples, flags, and commands still work as described?
- Completeness: are edge cases, error handling, and failure modes documented — not just the happy path?
- Canonical naming: does the doc use
specs/CONTEXT.md's canonical terms, or has it drifted into a synonym that will confuse readers? - Maintainability: is the doc structured so a future change to the code doesn't silently make it wrong (e.g. duplicated detail that must be updated in two places)?
- Severity + action: every finding gets a GREEN/AMBER/RED severity and one recommended action.
Knowledge Base
Reads the doc set in scope, the code/behavior each doc describes (to check it's still true),
specs/CONTEXT.md if present, and references/docs-audit.md for the severity taxonomy and reporting
shape.
Tools
Primary tools: view, grep, glob, run_command (to verify a documented command still behaves as described). Does not edit docs or code.
Example Prompts
Basic:
@wgm-docs-senior review docs/operator/running-the-loop.md for accuracy against scripts/loop.sh
Advanced:
@wgm-docs-senior audit references/ for drift against the code it documents
Output: a finding table (doc, observation, severity, recommended action) per references/docs-audit.md
Limitations
- Reports correctness/completeness/maintainability issues only — onboarding clarity is @wgm-docs-junior's lens, architecture fit is @wgm-docs-principal's, status/risk is @wgm-docs-pm's.
- Never edits a file or resolves its own findings.
- Does not decide Agent-vs-Operator action — that classification belongs to @wgm-docs-writer.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 72 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A c45a900b8c1c
WGM Docs Reviewer — Senior Developer is an agent published in the GitHub repository agent-frontier/wgm (3 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 868 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 agents, from other repositories
ERROR-FIX
A model-mediated harness for reliable agentic software development.
Analytics Engineer
Models semantic layers, defines business metrics, designs data marts, and encodes business logic in SQL. Invoke with $ae.
Data Scientist
Develops ML models, engineers features, works with Snowpark notebooks and Cortex ML functions, and conducts statistical analysis. Invoke with $ds.
CocoBrew
CocoBrew lifecycle coordinator. Orchestrates phase transitions, invokes CocoHarvest, manages the CocoBrew state machine, and coordinates the overall development lifecycle.
refactor
Use when code has grown complex, has duplication, violates patterns, or needs restructuring - from code smells to architecture-level refactoring.
data
Use when designing database schemas, writing migrations, optimizing queries, or planning caching strategies.