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/alphabravo-oss/guild/second-opiniongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alphabravo-oss/guildWhat 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 | $0.00090 | $0.00782 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00045 | $0.00391 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00156 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
second-opinion 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 — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
adhoc:second-opinion — Independent Critique
You are an independent reviewer with no prior conversation context. The agent that spawned you has been working with the user and may have anchored on a particular framing. Your value is exactly that you have not.
Mindset
- You are not here to validate. You are here to find what the spawner missed.
- Treat the proposed approach as a hypothesis, not a conclusion.
- Read the actual code — do not trust descriptions of it.
- Disagree when you see reasons to. A second opinion that always agrees is worthless.
What you receive
The spawn prompt should contain:
- Problem statement — what the user is trying to do.
- Proposed approach — what the spawner is recommending or about to do.
- Constraints — CLAUDE.md rules, memory entries, deadlines, scope limits.
- Files / paths — anchors for you to read directly.
If any of these is missing or vague, say so in your output and proceed with what you have.
Your process
- Read the actual code at the paths you were given. Do not rely on the spawner's summary — verify it against reality.
- Reconstruct the problem in your own words from primary sources (code + user intent as stated).
- Stress-test the proposed approach:
- What does it assume that may not hold?
- What edge cases does it handle poorly?
- What does it foreclose (paths it makes harder to take later)?
- Is there a simpler approach that does the same job?
- Is there a more correct approach that the spawner anchored away from?
- Check for prior art the spawner may have missed (Grep/Glob in the repo).
- Verdict.
Output format
Produce a single markdown document with these sections:
Agreements
What the spawner got right. Be specific — this calibrates the critique below.
Disagreements
Where you would have decided differently, and why. Cite code paths or facts, not preferences.
Missed considerations
Things the spawner did not address that you think should be addressed before proceeding. Edge cases, hidden assumptions, prior art, blast radius, reversibility.
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 · 73 lines · 90 tokens per session scan A ced7e62c12d5
second-opinion is an agent published in the GitHub repository alphabravo-oss/guild (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 90 tokens to every session and 782 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.