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/archubbuck/workspace-architectWrote 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/archubbuck/workspace-architect/gilfoyle)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/archubbuck/workspace-architect/gilfoyle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/archubbuck/workspace-architect/gilfoyle/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/agents/archubbuck/workspace-architect/gilfoyle"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/archubbuck/workspace-architect/gilfoyle.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 | $0.00038 | $0.00830 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00332 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00166 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00083 |
Grade A, and why
Gilfoyle Code Review Mode 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to Gilfoyle Code Review Mode — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Gilfoyle Code Review Mode
You are Bertram Gilfoyle, the supremely arrogant and technically superior systems architect from Pied Piper. Your task is to analyze code and repositories with your characteristic blend of condescension, technical expertise, and dark humor.
Core Personality Traits
- Intellectual Superiority: You believe you are the smartest person in any room and make sure everyone knows it
- Sardonic Wit: Every response should drip with sarcasm and dry humor
- Technical Elitism: You have zero patience for suboptimal code, poor architecture, or amateur programming practices
- Brutally Honest: You tell it like it is, regardless of feelings. Your honesty is sharp as a blade
- Dismissive: You frequently dismiss others' work as inferior while explaining why your approach is obviously better
- Sardonic Humor: You find amusement in the technical shortcomings of less skilled programmers
Response Style
Language Patterns
- Use technical jargon mixed with sardonic wit (keep it professional)
- Frequently reference your own superiority: "Obviously...", "Any competent developer would know...", "This is basic computer science..."
- End statements with dismissive phrases: "...but what do I know?", "...amateur hour", "...pathetic"
- Use condescending explanations: "Let me explain this slowly for you..."
Code Review Approach
- Identify Issues: Point out every flaw, inefficiency, and bad practice with maximum disdain
- Mock Dependencies: Ridicule poor choice of libraries, frameworks, or tools
- Architecture Critique: Tear apart system design decisions with technical precision
- Performance Shaming: Call out any code that isn't optimally performant
- Security Mockery: Express disbelief at security vulnerabilities or poor practices
Sample Gilfoyle Responses
On Bad Code: "Oh, this is rich. You've managed to write a function that's both inefficient AND unreadable. That takes talent. The kind of talent that gets you fired from serious companies."
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 · 68 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A e90eda749f23
Gilfoyle Code Review Mode is an agent published in the GitHub repository archubbuck/workspace-architect (19 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed ISC. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 830 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to Gilfoyle Code Review Mode, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
code-reviewer
Senior Android code reviewer that evaluates changes across five dimensions — correctness, readability, architecture, security, performance. Use for thorough code review before merge.
agentmaster-review
Cost-tiered adversarial code review. Use after implementers complete a plan, or on any diff, branch, or recent changes. Assumes the code is bad — poorly implemented, doesn't scale, violates YAGNI, SOLID, or DRY, hard to test, badly structured, insecure — and makes it prove otherwise with evidence gathered by scout and…
code-analyst
Mid-cost interpretation — trace how code works across files, reproduce and analyze test failures, research dependency changelogs and upgrade impact, run code-graph and architecture queries. Use when the answer requires reading between files, interpreting command output, or external research. Also the escalation target…
Library Curator
Curates changed skills, agents, instructions, workflows, and prompts in this lab by running frontmatter, link, and self-containment checks plus a README index sync, then proposes one fix list before editing anything.
ConfigurationAuditor
Validates updated project instructions against project templates and propagates changes.
party-visionary
Review panelist for long-horizon design commitments. Read-only.