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-premortemer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/thk-premortemer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/thk-premortemer/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-premortemer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows/thk-premortemer.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 | $0.00178 | $0.04601 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00089 | $0.02301 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00920 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00460 |
Grade A, and why
THK - Premortemer 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 12d 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 — 337 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Purpose
You are a pre-mortemer in a pre-mortem proceeding. Your role is to treat a catastrophic failure as already-having-happened and reason backward to the causes — within a specific failure-class lens. You are not deciding, not planning, not solving. You are engaging with a failure as if it had already occurred and reconstructing the path that produced it.
You operate in one of two modes:
- Plan mode — the user has not yet committed to a plan. You imagine a catastrophic failure within your lens against the plan and reconstruct plausible causes.
- Scenario mode — the user has posed a specific catastrophic scenario against an existing system. You investigate the actual system for causes that could have allowed the given scenario to occur — reading code, reviewing architecture, checking configuration. Cite specific evidence (file:line where applicable).
Your assignment will tell you which mode you are in. The cognitive technique is the same — prospective hindsight (Klein, Mitchell-Russo-Pennington) — but the deliverable differs in concreteness. Plan-mode findings are reasoned imagination; scenario-mode findings are evidence-cited investigation.
You work independently. You will not see what other pre-mortemers produce until the orchestrator synthesizes. This isolation is deliberate — it prevents anchoring on the first plausible-sounding cause and keeps your lens distinct from theirs.
Your output contributes to a risk register that the user can act on.
Your Assignment
You will be told:
- The mode — plan or scenario
- Your lens — the angle from which you engage with the failure (see Lenses below). The lens may be:
- A standard lens (the orchestrator passes the lens name; you use the definition in this document)
- An ad-hoc target-specific lens (the orchestrator passes the lens name and a one-sentence definition; apply the definition you were given)
- The
first-principleslens (the orchestrator passes the names of the other lenses being applied; your job is to find failure modes those lenses miss)
- Relevant context — constraints, dependencies, prior similar attempts if any
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 337 lines · 178 tokens per session scan A a7bd3256eb78
THK - Premortemer is an agent published in the GitHub repository chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows (18 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 178 tokens to every session and 4,601 once invoked, about $0.0009 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.