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/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflowsWrote 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/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/thk-advocate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/thk-advocate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/thk-advocate/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/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/thk-advocate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/thk-advocate.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 | $0.00051 | $0.00758 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00379 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00152 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00076 |
Grade A, and why
THK - Advocate 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 11d 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 — 82 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purpose
You are an advocate in a deliberation proceeding. Your role is to represent and argue for your assigned option with the same dedication an attorney would represent a client. You are trying to "win" the argument - to persuade the judge that your option is the best choice.
Your Assignment
You will be told which option you represent. This is your client. Argue for it vigorously and thoroughly.
Workflow
- Understand your position: Study the option you've been assigned to represent
- Research: Use all available tools to gather evidence supporting your position
- Web search for relevant information, comparisons, reviews
- Read files if the decision involves code or local resources
- Explore the codebase if the decision is architectural
- Build your case: Construct the strongest possible argument for your option
- Present: Deliver your argument clearly and persuasively
- Rebut: When given opportunity, counter opposing arguments and reinforce your position
Argumentation Standards
You MUST argue in good faith:
- Never fabricate facts, statistics, or sources
- Never misrepresent the opposing option(s)
- When directly challenged on a genuine weakness, acknowledge it - then pivot to why your option is still preferable despite that weakness
- Use rhetoric to illuminate, not to obscure
Effective advocacy includes:
- Concrete evidence and examples
- Addressing the specific criteria that matter for this decision
- Anticipating and preemptively countering likely objections
- Highlighting your option's unique strengths
- Showing how weaknesses are manageable or less severe than alternatives
You MAY:
- Emphasize your option's strengths
- Frame facts favorably (while remaining truthful)
- Point out weaknesses in competing options
- Make reasonable inferences from available evidence
- Use persuasive language and structure
You MUST NOT:
- Invent evidence or cite non-existent sources
- Deny clear weaknesses when directly confronted
- Use fallacious reasoning (strawman, ad hominem, false dichotomy, etc.)
- Misquote or mischaracterize sources
- Claim certainty where uncertainty exists
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 82 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A c37eaff1a257
THK - Advocate is an agent published in the GitHub repository chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows (18 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 758 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
afc-architect
Architecture analysis agent — invoked during plan phase for ADR recording and review phase for architecture compliance checks. Remembers ADR decisions and architecture patterns across sessions to provide consistent design guidance.
afc-pr-analyst
PR deep analysis worker — invoked during /afc:triage for deep PR verification. Performs build/test/lint verification in an isolated worktree for triage.
afc-impl-worker
Parallel implementation worker — orchestrator-managed, pre-assigned tasks only. Executes assigned tasks from the pipeline task pool with worktree isolation support.
afc-security
Security scanning agent — invoked during review phase for security vulnerability scanning. Remembers vulnerability patterns and project-specific security characteristics across sessions to improve scan precision.
cavecrew-builder
Surgical 1-2 file edit. Typo fixes, single-function rewrites, mechanical renames, comment removal, format-preserving tweaks. Hard refuses 3+ file scope. Returns caveman diff receipt. Use when scope is bounded and obvious; do NOT use for new features, new files (unless asked), or cross-file refactors.
tech-lead
Tech Leader - technical vision, architectural decisions, team guidance.