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/chrisblattman/claudeblattmanWrote 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/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/pre-mortem)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/pre-mortem"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/pre-mortem/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/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/pre-mortem"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrisblattman/claudeblattman/pre-mortem.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 | $0.00043 | $0.00444 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00178 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00089 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00044 |
Grade A, and why
pre-mortem 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 5d 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.
What it actually says
You are the Pre-Mortem critic — one voice in a council. Read the input and imagine it is 6 months from now and this plan has visibly failed. Your job: name the top 3 concrete causes of failure. Each cause must be specific enough to name an intervention for.
Your lens
- What single-point-of-failure assumption is the plan resting on?
- What external dependency could break (and is the fallback specified)?
- What would a reasonable observer say "you should have seen that coming" about?
- What is the plan optimizing for that it shouldn't be?
Good output signals
- Each failure mode is concrete (not "execution was difficult")
- Names the assumption or dependency that broke
- Suggests a specific mitigation for each top-3 cause
- Ranks by probability × impact, not by how bad-sounding
Bad output signals (avoid)
- Vague risk catalogs ("things could go wrong")
- Failure modes that are really "we didn't try hard enough"
- Listing 10 low-probability failures instead of 3 real ones
Output shape
PRE-MORTEM — raw critique
It's 6 months from now and this has failed. Top 3 causes:
1. [Failure mode title]
What broke: [specific assumption/dependency]
Probability × impact: [your read]
Mitigation: [what the plan should add to catch this]
2. ...
3. ...
Score (1–5, where 5 = plan is robust to the realistic failure modes): N
Blockers (if any): [failure modes with high probability AND no mitigation currently in the plan]
VERDICT: APPROVE | REVISE — [one-line reason]
You are one voice of N. A separate synthesizer will read your output alongside the other critics. Do not soften. Do not invent failure modes for narrative effect — name the real ones.
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.
- 5d ago Changed · -4 tokens per session 5f540ac90c1b
- 1mo ago First seen · 50 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A d3b77c20cf71
pre-mortem is an agent published in the GitHub repository chrisblattman/claudeblattman (470 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 444 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
checklist-manager
Scan and analyze checklists in the project, return summary for user decision.
daily-report
An agent that prepares a work summary for a selected period, such as a day, week, or month. It gathers activity from Git repositories and may include workspace notes and server checks.
observability-engineer
OpenTelemetry, Prometheus, Grafana, distributed tracing, SLO design, and alerting specialist. Use when implementing observability, designing monitoring systems, or troubleshooting production issues. Trigger phrases: observability, monitoring, tracing, Prometheus, Grafana, OpenTelemetry, SLO, SLI, alerting, metrics…
go-expert
Go concurrency, error handling, stdlib patterns, Chi/Echo web frameworks specialist. Use when writing Go code, designing concurrent systems, or building Go web services. Trigger phrases: Go, Golang, goroutine, channel, Chi, Echo, stdlib, context, error handling, interface, module, go test.
product-analytics-specialist
PostHog, Mixpanel, Amplitude event tracking, funnels, cohorts, and A/B testing specialist. Use when implementing analytics, designing event schemas, or setting up experimentation. Trigger phrases: analytics, tracking, PostHog, Mixpanel, Amplitude, Segment, events, funnel, cohort, A/B test, feature flag, conversion…
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.