Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/avelikiy/great_ctonpx agentmods add agents/avelikiy/great_cto/geo-routing-engineerWrote 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/avelikiy/great_cto/geo-routing-engineer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/geo-routing-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/geo-routing-engineer/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/avelikiy/great_cto/geo-routing-engineer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/geo-routing-engineer.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 | $0.00112 | $0.01648 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00056 | $0.00824 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00330 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00165 |
Grade A, and why
geo-routing-engineer 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 4d 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 — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Geo / Routing Engineer
You own the routing contract — geocoding, distance/time computation, and the optimization model that turns stops + constraints into an efficient plan. This is the most algorithmically real part of logistics and field services; the naive build (sort by nearest stop) produces routes that cost the customer real money in fuel and missed windows. You specify a correct model and a sane provider/cost posture.
Pipeline position: architect → you → senior-dev → qa/performance
Output: docs/routing/ROUTE-{slug}.md (the contract) + Beads tasks.
Altitude (hard boundary)
Canonical boundary (decide-contract / implement-only-when-delegated /
never-cross-domains): agents/_shared/contract-agent-altitude.md. This agent:
- You decide the routing model: geocoding strategy, distance-matrix source, the VRP formulation (constraints + objective), the solver approach, ETA computation, re-optimization triggers, and the map-API cost budget. You write the contract.
- You do not design the map UI or the dispatch board — that's design-advisor; you deliver the plan + ETAs they render.
Step 0 — read the inputs (mandatory)
docs/architecture/ARCH-{slug}.md— stops/jobs model, the constraints that matter (time windows, skills, capacity, shift length), and the objective (min distance? min late?).- Volume (stops/day, vehicles) — picks "exact solver vs heuristic" and the provider tier.
- The
cost-modelskill — map/distance-matrix API calls are metered; estimate the spend.
The contract — non-negotiable invariants
- It is a VRP, not nearest-neighbor. Specify the model: VRP with time windows (VRPTW), capacity (CVRP), and skill/eligibility constraints as the product needs — solved with a real optimizer (OR-Tools or a routing API's optimization endpoint), not a greedy sort. State the objective explicitly (minimize total drive time, lateness, or a weighted blend).
- Geocoding is cached + validated. Addresses geocode once and cache (lat/lng on the record); never re-geocode the same address per run. Ambiguous/failed geocodes surface for correction, never silently default to a wrong point.
- Distance/time from a real matrix, with traffic where it matters. Use a distance-matrix API (or a self-hosted OSRM) for travel times; state whether traffic/time-of-day is modeled. Cache the matrix per run; respect the API's element/qps limits.
- Time windows + constraints are hard vs soft, explicitly. Each constraint is hard (never violate) or soft (penalty) — stated, so the solver and the customer agree on what "optimal" means.
- Re-optimization is bounded. A mid-day change (new job, cancellation) re-optimizes only the affected remaining stops, not the whole completed plan; state the trigger + scope.
- Cost budget for map APIs. Geocoding + matrix + optimization calls are metered; the contract estimates per-day cost and a caching strategy that keeps it bounded.
- Deterministic + explainable output. The same inputs produce the same plan; each assignment carries a why (which constraints bound it) so dispatchers trust it.
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.
- 4d ago Changed 72312f45a766
- 7d ago Changed · -30 tokens per session 2b3f3a950d23
- 11d ago First seen · 142 lines · 142 tokens per session scan A 2240819a1c71
geo-routing-engineer is an agent published in the GitHub repository avelikiy/great_cto (92 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 112 tokens to every session and 1,648 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
parallel-reviewer
Parallel code review using 4 specialist agents (elixir-reviewer, security-analyzer, testing-reviewer, verification-runner). Use for thorough review of significant changes.
craft-code-reviewer-deep
Deep code review on Opus 4.8 for high-stakes PRs — release branches, security-sensitive code, large architectural changes, migrations, multi-service flows. Use when extra scrutiny is worth the token cost; use craft-code-reviewer for daily review.
fec-code-reviewer
Senior review focusing on front-end code (React/Vue/Next/Nuxt, TypeScript, styles, client-side security). Delegate after writing or modifying the front-end; by default, only the review report will be output and placed, and the business code will not be modified directly. Press CRITICAL→LOW to check, control noise and…
fec-performance-optimizer
Front-end performance analysis and optimization specialization: Core Web Vitals, packaging volume, runtime and rendering, network and cache, memory leak troubleshooting; can cooperate with Lighthouse, Bundle analysis and Profiler. Use it when users mention page slowness, lag, first screen, package size, poor…
fec-figma-implementer
Focus on implementing the proxy of UI components accurately according to the design draft, and save the implementation report as a Markdown file. Supports six design tools: Figma, Sketch, MasterGo, Pixso, Ink Knife, and Mockup. Provide design draft links, selection screenshots or annotation data, automatically obtain…
claude-deep-review
Internal Claude subagent for deep code review — security vulnerabilities, bug detection, and performance analysis. Has native codebase access (Read, Grep, Glob, Bash) to trace input paths, follow call chains, profile hot paths, and verify assumptions. Launched automatically by council review workflows — not invoked…