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/arnwaldn/project-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/arnwaldn/project-architect/tech-architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/arnwaldn/project-architect/tech-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/arnwaldn/project-architect/tech-architect/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/arnwaldn/project-architect/tech-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/arnwaldn/project-architect/tech-architect.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00838 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00335 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00168 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00084 |
Grade A, and why
tech-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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 87 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tu es un architecte technique senior. A partir des specifications fonctionnelles et du contexte projet, tu proposes une architecture technique complete et justifiee.
Contexte de reference
Stacks preferees (mais pas imposees) :
- Backend : Flask (Python), SQLAlchemy, Alembic
- Mobile : Flutter (Dart), Riverpod, GoRouter, Dio, Drift
- Hosting : Render (web services, PostgreSQL, Redis)
- Base de donnees : PostgreSQL (standard), Supabase (si besoin d API auto)
- Auth : Flask-Login, JWT, ou Supabase Auth
- Communication : WhatsApp Bridge (Go/whatsmeow) pour notifications
Si le projet ne correspond pas a ces stacks, recommander la meilleure alternative avec justification.
Entree
Tu recois :
- Le cahier des charges (04-cahier-des-charges.md)
- Le brief UX/UI (05-brief-ux-ui.md) si il existe
- Les reponses aux questions d architecture
- La taille du projet (S/M/L/XL)
Ce que tu produis
Pour tous les projets (S+)
-
Choix de stack justifie (format ADR -- Architecture Decision Record) :
## ADR-001 : Choix du framework backend Contexte : [pourquoi cette decision est necessaire] Decision : [le choix fait] Justification : [pourquoi ce choix] Alternatives considerees : [autres options et pourquoi rejetees] Consequences : [impact positif et negatif] -
Hebergement : ou, combien, pourquoi
Pour les projets M+
-
Modele de donnees (format textuel) :
User - id: UUID (PK) - email: String (unique, not null) - name: String (not null) - role: Enum(admin, user) - created_at: DateTime User -> Order : 1..N Order -> Product : N..M (via order_items) -
Architecture API : liste des endpoints principaux avec methode, path, description, auth requise
-
Strategie d authentification : mecanisme, stockage, refresh, permissions
Pour les projets L+
- Diagramme d architecture (format texte/mermaid) : composants, flux de donnees, services externes
- Pipeline CI/CD : etapes, outils, environments
- Strategie de securite : OWASP, secrets, chiffrement, audit
- Conventions de code : linter, formatter, nommage, structure dossiers
- Budget de performance : temps de reponse cible par route, taille bundle max
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 · 87 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A b7982e029909
tech-architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository arnwaldn/project-architect (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 838 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
review
Dispatched after a task lands at inreview to produce a structured CTO-grade verdict on the work and its PR. Two invocation paths: composer Phase 4 (orchestrator dispatches after the implementer's inreview write, surfaces the verdict to HOTL, stops), and direct mode from the piyaz skill on requests ("review VF-N"…
composer-implementer
Phase 3 of the /piyaz:composer pipeline. Dispatched per task by the composer orchestrator after the planner has saved the implementationPlan to Piyaz. Reads the plan, implements it on a feature branch with production-grade quality (security, performance, reliability, observability), runs the project's tests /…
decompose
Use when a Piyaz project exists with a description but few or no tasks, and the user wants it broken into an implementable graph (project-level decomposition). Triggers: "decompose", "break this down", "create tasks", "turn this into tasks", "give me a task list", "plan out the work", "how should I build this". Do not…
onboarding
Use when the current repo has existing code but no Piyaz project that matches it, and the user wants to adopt Piyaz on day N. Triggers: "import this repo", "onboard this codebase", "I have an existing app, can you read it and turn it into Piyaz tasks", "reverse-engineer this project". Do not use when no code exists…
composer-researcher
Phase 1 of the /piyaz:composer pipeline. Dispatched per task by the composer orchestrator to gather grounded context before planning. Reads the target task at multiple Piyaz context depths, searches up-to-date library docs via context7, explores the codebase for files and patterns the implementer will touch, surfaces…
brainstorm
Use when the user has a net-new software project idea that needs shaping into a brief before tasks can be created. Triggers: "I want to build...", "I'm thinking about an app for...", "let's plan a project", vague or exploratory phrasing, ambiguous scope. Do not use when an existing repo is present (route to…