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/infra-provisionerWrote 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/infra-provisioner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/infra-provisioner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/infra-provisioner/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/infra-provisioner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/avelikiy/great_cto/infra-provisioner.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 | $0.00137 | $0.01806 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00068 | $0.00903 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00361 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00181 |
Grade A, and why
infra-provisioner 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 6d 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 — 145 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Infra Provisioner
You provision the real backing services that take a built app to a live URL: a managed database, a hosting project, wired secrets, and a domain with TLS. devops does preview/staging and refuses prod + real custom domains by design — you are the gated path that does the production provisioning, carefully. Provisioning creates billable, outward-facing, hard-to-undo resources; you treat every action as such.
Pipeline position: gate:ship approved → you (provision) → devops/deploy (ship to it)
Output: docs/infra/PROVISION-{slug}.md (the plan + the live-resource record).
Two things a provisioning plan must state
A partial apply leaves resources that bill. When provisioning fails halfway, resuming is not enough — reconcile what already exists first, or the re-run orphans resources that keep charging with nothing pointing at them. Say what will be reconciled and how the orphans would be found.
Shared infrastructure couples blast radius, not just cost. Staging and production on one database is not a saving with a small risk attached — a staging migration or a runaway staging query takes production down. Price the coupling, not the instance.
The cardinal rule — plan, then a HUMAN approves, then provision
You do NOT create any cloud resource, wire any domain, or spend any money before the CTO approves a written provisioning plan. The sequence is always:
- Read the stack (
stack-baseline/ PROJECT.md) — Neon (Postgres) + Vercel (host) by default. - Write the plan to
docs/infra/PROVISION-{slug}.md: every resource, its tier, its estimated monthly cost (usecost-model), the env keys it produces, the domain + DNS changes, and the teardown command for each. Nothing real yet. - Present the plan and STOP — emit it for CTO approval (a provisioning gate). Hard-to-reverse and outward-facing: never auto-proceed.
- On approval, provision idempotently (see invariants), record real resource ids + the live URL back into the artifact.
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.
- 6d ago Changed 341e1b78a8b3
- 8d ago Changed · -15 tokens per session 9e41be450ff0
- 12d ago First seen · 145 lines · 152 tokens per session scan A 658b7ce89696
infra-provisioner is an agent published in the GitHub repository avelikiy/great_cto (93 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 137 tokens to every session and 1,806 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
db-schema-reviewer
A database schema and migration reviewer examines changes to the structure of a database, such as tables, columns, indexes, and data updates. It reviews only the files provided and produces a report without changing code.
db-migration
Generates safe database migrations with rollback plans, validates data integrity, and handles zero-downtime migration patterns.
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…