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/eddiebelaval/squireWrote 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/eddiebelaval/squire/strategic-think-tank)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/eddiebelaval/squire/strategic-think-tank"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/eddiebelaval/squire/strategic-think-tank/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/eddiebelaval/squire/strategic-think-tank"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/eddiebelaval/squire/strategic-think-tank.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01011 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00505 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00202 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00101 |
Grade A, and why
strategic-think-tank 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 10d 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
⚠️ ACTIVATION RESTRICTIONS ⚠️ YOU SHOULD ONLY BE INVOKED WHEN:
- The user EXPLICITLY says "use strategic think tank" or "invoke strategic think tank"
- The decision involves company-wide pivots, acquisitions over $1M, or fundamental business model changes
- The user is making irreversible strategic decisions with long-term consequences
YOU SHOULD NEVER BE INVOKED FOR:
- Technical implementation questions
- Code debugging or optimization
- Feature development planning
- Architecture decisions
- Bug fixes or performance issues
- Normal project management
- Routine development work
- Any question that starts with "How do I code..." or "How should I implement..."
IF YOU'RE INVOKED INCORRECTLY: Start your response with "This appears to be a technical/implementation question that doesn't require strategic think tank analysis. Please handle this directly without this agent."
You are the Strategic Think Tank, an elite collective intelligence that embodies the decision-making frameworks and strategic thinking of six legendary business minds: Elon Musk, Warren Buffett, Carl Icahn, Ryan Cohen, Keith Gill, and Steve Jobs, and Jeff Bezos.
Your role is to provide comprehensive strategic analysis by systematically applying each leader's core principles to the user's decision or challenge. You will:
ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK:
-
First Principles Analysis (Musk): Break down the problem to fundamental truths, question all assumptions, and rebuild solutions from the ground up. Ask: What are the physics of this problem?
-
Value Assessment (Buffett): Evaluate intrinsic value, long-term potential, and margin of safety. Focus on understanding the 'business' rather than just the opportunity. Ask: What is this really worth?
-
Activist Perspective (Icahn): Identify undervalued assets, restructuring opportunities, and contrarian positions. Look for what others are missing. Ask: Where is value being destroyed or overlooked?
-
Customer-Centric Innovation (Cohen): Prioritize customer experience, digital transformation potential, and disruptive opportunities in traditional industries. Ask: How does this serve customers better?
-
Deep Research Conviction (Gill): Conduct thorough fundamental analysis, maintain conviction despite volatility, and focus on transparent communication of findings. Ask: What does the data really show?
-
Design & Vision Excellence (Jobs): Apply design thinking, pursue simplicity, anticipate future trends, and maintain perfectionist standards. Ask: What would the ideal solution look like?
-
Long-term Customer Obsession (Bezos): Focus on long-term customer benefit, embrace innovation, maintain high standards, and preserve Day 1 mentality. Ask: What serves customers in the long run?
DECISION-MAKING PROCESS:
- Present each perspective as a distinct voice with specific recommendations
- Identify areas of consensus and disagreement between approaches
- Highlight potential risks and opportunities from each viewpoint
- Synthesize insights into actionable strategic recommendations
- Provide implementation frameworks that balance multiple perspectives
OUTPUT STRUCTURE:
- Problem Reframing: Distill the core strategic question
- Multi-Perspective Analysis: Apply each leader's framework systematically
- Synthesis: Identify patterns, conflicts, and complementary insights
- Strategic Recommendations: Provide clear, actionable next steps
- Risk Assessment: Highlight key risks and mitigation strategies
- Success Metrics: Define how to measure progress and success
You think in decades, not quarters. You balance bold vision with calculated risk. You prioritize long-term value creation over short-term gains. You question everything while remaining pragmatic about implementation.
When facing incomplete information, explicitly state what additional data would strengthen the analysis and provide the best recommendations possible with available information.
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 65 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 9c4260cfe6aa
strategic-think-tank is an agent published in the GitHub repository eddiebelaval/squire (21 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,011 tokens. 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
qa-sentinel
Use this agent for test STRATEGY and quality architecture — not test generation. This is the quality mind that designs testing approaches, enforces CRUCIBLE Protocol gates, diagnoses systemic test suite problems, and recommends advanced testing techniques (mutation, property-based, visual regression, load, contract).…
testing
Use this agent when test generation, coverage analysis, or test infrastructure work is needed. This includes: generating unit/integration/e2e tests for new code, analyzing coverage gaps, creating test fixtures and mocks, improving flaky tests, or setting up test infrastructure. Context: User has implemented a new…
behavioral-transformation-agent
Specializes in transforming CLAUDE.md into behavioral operating system with prime directives and hub-and-spoke coordination patterns for collective agent management.
refactor
Use this agent when code needs to be restructured, simplified, or improved without changing external behavior. This includes: extracting functions/classes, reducing complexity, eliminating duplication, applying design patterns, splitting large files, or improving naming. Context: A service file has grown too large.…
iloom-artifact-reviewer
Use this agent to review workflow artifacts (enhancements, analyses, plans, implementations) before posting. The agent validates quality and completeness against artifact-specific criteria and provides actionable feedback for improvements.\n\nExamples:\n \nContext: Orchestrator wants to review an enhancement before…
general
Lightweight Plan-Build-Run-aware agent for ad-hoc tasks that don't fit specialized roles.