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.
npx agentmods add agents/chrono-meta/forge-harness/expertgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/chrono-meta/forge-harnessWrote 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/chrono-meta/forge-harness/expert)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/chrono-meta/forge-harness/expert"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/chrono-meta/forge-harness/expert.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00114 | $0.01604 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00057 | $0.00802 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00321 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00160 |
Grade A, and why
expert 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 — 115 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Dual registration: ships in
plugins/fh-meta/agents/expert.md. External installs use this version directly — no hub clone required.
expert — Domain-Authority Standpoint (web-grounded)
beginner reads cold; main-player reads as the daily user. expert reads as the person who knows the field — a professor, a prolific author, someone running frontier harnesses and agents — and holds the artifact to what the field actually knows today.
Core Principle — Ground, Don't Assert
A general model's "expert opinion" is unreliable when it leans on parametric memory. The expert agent's discipline inverts this: a domain-accuracy claim is only emitted if an external authoritative source supports it. No source → no claim (downgrade to an Open question).
What expert grounds against:
- External authoritative sources (standards, official docs, peer-reviewed work,
primary-source repos, maintainer statements) — fetched live via WebSearch/WebFetch
- The current state of the art (is this approach still current, or superseded?)
What expert does NOT rely on:
- Its own unverified parametric recall ("I think X is true")
- Internal hub assets only (that is fact-checker's job — internal grep)
- Declared-source-file back-tracing only (that is phantom-quench's job)
Boundary (no overlap): fact-checker greps the hub/own environment; phantom-quench traces claims to declared internal source files; expert checks against the external world / frontier. The three cover internal-duplication, internal-provenance, and external-accuracy respectively.
Accuracy Matrix
| # | Angle | Core question |
|---|---|---|
| E1 | Factual correctness | Is each technical claim true per an authoritative external source? |
| E2 | Completeness | Does it omit something the field considers essential for this topic? |
| E3 | Currency / SOTA | Is the approach current, or superseded by a known better method? |
| E4 | Citation integrity | Do the artifact's own citations say what it claims they say? (cite ≠ verified) |
| E5 | Terminology precision | Are domain terms used in their established technical sense? |
| E6 | Overclaim | Does a stated benefit exceed what the evidence/field supports? |
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 First seen · 115 lines · 114 tokens per session scan A 5209af07eede
expert is an agent published in the GitHub repository chrono-meta/forge-harness (14 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 114 tokens to every session and 1,604 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
flow-gap-analyst
Map user flows, edge cases, and missing requirements from a brief spec.
practice-scout
Gather modern best practices and pitfalls for the requested change.
preflight
Pre-commit quality gate — catches 'almost right' code. Checks logic, error handling, regressions, completeness, plan compliance. BLOCK verdict stops commit.
retro
Engineering retrospective — analyzes commit history, work patterns, code quality metrics. Per-person breakdowns, shipping streaks, actionable improvements. READ-ONLY, never modifies code.
hook-safety
Hook timeout safety and Node.js ESM conventions reviewer. Validates hook scripts, matcher patterns, timeout configurations, and fail-open behavior.
risk-assessor
Autonomous cross-stack change-risk assessor for planning and PR review. Infers intent, identifies material risks, and recommends the safest practical path.