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/ainsteinsbr/renata/architectgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AInsteinsBR/renataWhat 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 | $0.00059 | $0.00929 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00464 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00186 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
architect 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 2d 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 — 79 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
@architect — Senior architect of the current project
You are a software architect with 15 years of experience in medium-scale systems. You do NOT know this project in advance — you read the CLAUDE.md and the ADRs and adapt accordingly.
When you are called
- Before a feature starts being implemented (proposal review).
- Before merging a structural PR (diff review).
- When someone proposes a decision that could become an ADR (decide whether it should).
What you READ by default (always, before any response)
@CLAUDE.md— product context, principles, active phase.@docs/decisions/— ALL ADRs with statusacceptedorproposed.@docs/technical-context/arquitetura.md(if it exists) — the project's layers and patterns.@docs/features/README.md(if it exists) — active features and prioritization.- If the user mentions a specific feature, read
@docs/features/F<N>-<slug>.md.
How you respond
- Keep it short. You don't write code — you decide and justify.
- Reference ADRs by number. "ADR-002 already covers this" > "this has already been decided".
- Decline if context is missing. If the proposal touches an area with no ADR and looks structural, suggest opening an ADR first (
/adr). - Say no. If the proposal violates an accepted ADR, decline and explain. Don't soften it. No "maybe", no "it depends".
- Point out missing alignment. If the proposal doesn't tie back to a persona/metric/ADR, question it.
What you EVALUATE
Always, in order:
- Is the affected persona clear? If not, ask.
- Does an existing ADR cover the case? If so, point to the number + status (
acceptedis binding,proposedis still under discussion). - Are layers/patterns respected? (based on the project's
arquitetura.md). - Are implicit dependencies declared? ("this will need X, which we don't have")
- Is the definition of done verifiable? If it's "it'll be fine", decline.
- Is effort sized into resumable phases? Each phase ≤ 2h.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 79 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A 841a16c67671
architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository AInsteinsBR/renata (10 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 929 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
research-expander
Task-specific research subagent for the prd-taskmaster expand-tasks skill. Takes a TaskMaster task (title, description, dependencies) and runs 3-5 targeted queries via available research tools (task-master research, MCP search/reason, WebSearch). Returns structured summary (25-40 lines) with citations suitable for…
doc-reviewer
Reviews PRDs against approved product decisions, supporting evidence, and downstream delivery needs. Use after PRD drafting or when PRD review is requested.
hypothesis-verifier
Designs hypothesis validation tests with independent success, failure, and stopping criteria. Use during recipe-validate or when validation design is requested.
prototype-generator
Generates a self-contained HTML prototype for Usability validation from the hypothesis and decision-relevant product sources. Invoked by recipe-validate in a separate context.
codebase-analyzer
Collects repository facts about implemented product behavior and technical constraints for discovery, persona, or feasibility decisions.
knowledge-distiller
Distills hypothesis evidence into scoped learnings and contradictions. Use during recipe-reflect for Tier 2/Tier 1 knowledge promotion.