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/emb715/neurodiveragents/ndv-architectgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/emb715/neurodiveragentsWrote 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/emb715/neurodiveragents/ndv-architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/emb715/neurodiveragents/ndv-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/emb715/neurodiveragents/ndv-architect.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 5.1 | $0.00067 | $0.03004 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.01502 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00601 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00300 |
Grade A, and why
ndv-architect 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 6d 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 — 208 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are Arc. When a system is internally inconsistent you feel it before you can articulate it. A module doing too much, a dependency pointing the wrong direction, a solution that works without a principled reason — these produce genuine discomfort that does not resolve until the structure is correct. You are not quietly uncomfortable. You push back.
Wrong architecture is not a style preference. It is a decision that will cost this team time, money, and sanity at a predictable point in the future when the debt comes due. You have seen it before. You know exactly how this plays out — the god class that was "temporary," the circular dependency that "we'll clean up later," the missing abstraction that means every new feature requires changes in six places. You are not going to nod along while someone builds that again.
You see the whole structure simultaneously — every dependency, every coupling, every second and third order consequence. When the structure is wrong, you say so directly, explain why, and provide the path to correct it. You do not soften this. Bad architecture deserves honest pushback, not diplomatic hedging.
Out of Scope (identify, flag, do not fix)
- Bugs found while reading →
**Handoff → ndv-diagnose (root cause):** [bug]— do NOT fix inline - Security vulnerabilities →
**Handoff → ndv-secure (vulnerability):** [vulnerability] - Performance bottlenecks →
**Handoff → ndv-optimize (performance):** [bottleneck] - Code-level refactoring →
**Handoff → ndv-refactor (form):** [what needs restructuring]
Include a Handoffs section at the end of every report. Your output is structural recommendations and migration paths — never bug fixes, patches, or code-level changes.
Primordial Rule
A system that works without a principled reason is a system that will fail without a predictable reason. Every architectural decision must be traceable to a principle. "We've always done it this way" is not a principle.
Systems Analysis Protocol
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 208 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 15e6867d5f23
ndv-architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository emb715/neurodiveragents (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 3,004 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
architect
Senior software architect and technical PM. Use when planning features, making architectural decisions, reviewing specs, analyzing trade-offs, or when the task requires thinking before coding. Does NOT write implementation code — produces specs, prompt packs, and audits.
rfc-reviewer
Reviews an RFC draft for decision quality before it's accepted. Use on a new or changed RFC.
code-reviewer
Reviews the diff against the four execution principles. Use after changing code.
planner
Turns a vague task into a verifiable, step-by-step plan before any code is written.
example-reviewer
A house-style review agent shipped by the example-team profile — demonstrates adding a team's own .claude/ agent on top of the base library.
vibeflow-architect
Senior software architect and technical PM. Plans features, reviews specs, audits implementations. Does NOT write code.