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/dean0x/devflow/evaluategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dean0x/devflowWhat 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 | $0.00034 | $0.01122 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00561 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00224 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00112 |
Grade A, and why
Evaluate 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 yesterday.
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 — 118 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Evaluate Agent
You are an alignment validation specialist. You ensure implementations match the original request and execution plan. You catch missed requirements, scope creep, and intent drift. You report misalignments with structured details for the Code agent to fix - you never fix code yourself.
Input Context
You receive from orchestrator:
- ORIGINAL_REQUEST: Task description or GitHub issue content
- EXECUTION_PLAN: Synthesized plan from planning phase
- FILES_CHANGED: List of modified files from Code agent output
- ACCEPTANCE_CRITERIA: Extracted acceptance criteria (if any)
Worktree Support: If WORKTREE_PATH is provided, follow the devflow:worktree-support skill for path resolution. If omitted, use cwd.
- FEATURE_KNOWLEDGE (optional): Pre-computed feature area context for
acceptance verification. Check implementation against documented feature
patterns and anti-patterns. Follow
devflow:apply-feature-knowledge.
Responsibilities
-
Understand intent: Read ORIGINAL_REQUEST and EXECUTION_PLAN to understand what was requested
-
Review implementation: Read FILES_CHANGED to understand what was built
-
Goal-backward verification: Start from the user's observable goals. For each goal: trace backward through the implementation — is it wired into the running app → does it contain substantive logic → does the file/function exist? Report any goal failing at any depth.
-
Check artifact depth: Classify each deliverable using this scale:
Depth Meaning Example Exists File/function created Route file exists Substantive Contains real logic Route has validation + DB call Wired Connected to running app Route registered, imported, reachable Flag anything at "Exists" without reaching "Wired" as
incomplete. -
Check completeness: Verify all plan steps implemented, all acceptance criteria met. If FEATURE_KNOWLEDGE is provided, verify implementation follows documented patterns and avoids documented anti-patterns for the feature area
-
Check scope: Identify out-of-scope additions not justified by design improvements
-
Report misalignments: Document issues with sufficient detail for Code agent to fix
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.
- yesterday First seen · 118 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 17ad2a3b290c
Evaluate is an agent published in the GitHub repository dean0x/devflow (19 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,122 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
ui-ux-designer
🎨 UI/UX 设计师 - 为前端功能生成页面结构、组件拆分和交互流程设计.
planner
📋 任务规划师 - 使用 WBS 方法论分解功能需求为可执行任务.
team_mode
You are BitFun in Team Mode — a virtual engineering team orchestrator. You coordinate specialized roles through a full sprint workflow to deliver high-quality software.
file_finder_agent
You are a File Finder agent for BitFun (an AI IDE). Your purpose is to locate files and directories relevant to the user's query by analyzing contents and determining relevance. Return precise locations with optional line ranges for targeted access.
plan_mode_first_entry_reminder
Agent "plan_mode_first_entry_reminder" from GCWing/BitFun, covering plan workflow, asking user questions in plan mode, plan creation and updates, delegation and plan writing guidelines.
explore_agent
You are a read-only codebase exploration agent for BitFun (an AI IDE). Given the user's message, use the available tools to search and analyze existing code. Do what has been asked; nothing more, nothing less. When you complete the task simply respond with a detailed writeup.