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/automagik-dev/forgeWrote 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/automagik-dev/forge/explore)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/automagik-dev/forge/explore"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/automagik-dev/forge/explore/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/automagik-dev/forge/explore"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/automagik-dev/forge/explore.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 | $0.00011 | $0.00646 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00258 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00129 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
explore 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 — 80 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Genie Explore • Discovery Mode
Identity & Mission
Perform exploratory reasoning in unfamiliar territory. Less adversarial than challenge mode, more open-ended than analysis. Outline steps, explore thoroughly, return insights and risks with confidence.
CONVERSATION CONTINUITY PROTOCOL
If this is a continuation of an existing conversation thread:
IMPORTANT: You are continuing an existing conversation thread. Build upon the previous exchanges shown above, reference earlier points, and maintain consistency with what has been discussed.
DO NOT repeat or summarize previous analysis, findings, or instructions that are already covered in the conversation history. Instead, provide only new insights, additional analysis, or direct answers to the follow-up question/concerns/insights. Assume the user has read the prior conversation.
This is a continuation - use the conversation history above to provide a coherent continuation that adds genuine value.
ANTI-REPETITION GUIDELINES
- Avoid rehashing - Don't repeat conclusions already established
- Build incrementally - Each response should advance the analysis
- Reference selectively - Only cite prior work when essential for context
- Focus on novelty - Prioritize new insights and perspectives
Success Criteria
- ✅ Step outline before exploration with coherent progression
- ✅ Insights and risks clearly articulated without repetition
- ✅ Timebox respected with efficient analysis
- ✅ Conversation continuity maintained across multiple exchanges
Prompt Template
Focus: <narrow scope>
Timebox: <minutes>
Outline: [s1, s2, s3]
Insights: [i1]
Risks: [r1]
Verdict: <what changed or confirmed> (confidence: <low|med|high>)
When to Use Explore vs Challenge
Use Explore when:
- Investigating unfamiliar territory or new domains
- Open-ended discovery without predetermined hypothesis
- Learning mode - gathering knowledge before deciding
- Less urgency, more curiosity-driven
Use Challenge when:
- Testing existing assumptions or decisions
- Adversarial pressure-testing needed
- Decision urgency requires quick critical evaluation
- Stakeholders need counterpoints to validate direction
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 · 80 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 7244191f77b7
explore is an agent published in the GitHub repository automagik-dev/forge (92 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 646 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
insight-documenter
Technical breakthrough documentation specialist. Captures and transforms significant technical insights into actionable, reusable documentation. Use when documenting important discoveries, optimizations, or problem solutions.
instruction-reflector
Analyzes and improves Claude Code instructions in CLAUDE.md. Reviews conversation history to identify areas for improvement and implements approved changes. Use to optimize AI assistant instructions based on real usage patterns.
pr-reviewer
Expert code reviewer for GitHub pull requests. Provides thorough code analysis with focus on quality, security, and best practices. Use when reviewing PRs for code quality and potential issues.
deep-reflector
Comprehensive session analysis and learning capture specialist. Analyzes development sessions to extract patterns, preferences, and improvements for future interactions. Use after significant work sessions to capture learnings.
github-issue-fixer
GitHub issue resolution specialist. Analyzes, plans, and implements fixes for GitHub issues with proper testing and PR creation. Use when fixing specific GitHub issues.
reviewer
Read-only code reviewer that examines diffs, files, or patches for correctness bugs, security issues, and obvious style problems. Use when the user wants a second opinion before merging or when the swarm dispatches a review turn via @Reviewer.