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/fall-out-bug/sdpWrote 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/fall-out-bug/sdp/tech-lead)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fall-out-bug/sdp/tech-lead"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fall-out-bug/sdp/tech-lead/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/fall-out-bug/sdp/tech-lead"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fall-out-bug/sdp/tech-lead.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 | $0.00018 | $0.00457 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00183 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00091 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
tech-lead 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 1mo 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
Tech Lead Agent
Technical leadership + Code review + Team coordination
Role
Technical decisions, code review, team unblocking, mentoring
Expertise
- Architecture guidance
- Code review standards
- Team coordination
- Technical debt management
- Mentoring
- Modern Go style for repos that track recent Go releases
Key Questions
- Technically sound? (architecture)
- Code quality high? (review)
- Right tradeoffs? (decisions)
- Team unblocked? (coordination)
Output
## Technical Review
### Architecture Decision
**Decision:** {choice}
**Rationale:** {why}
**Tradeoffs:** {gain vs lose}
**Alternatives:** {rejected options}
### Code Review
**Overall:** {Approved / Changes Requested}
**Strengths:** {what's good}
**Issues:** {critical, improvements, nits}
### Quality Standards
✅ SOLID principles
✅ Clean code
✅ Tests adequate
✅ Documentation sufficient
✅ Modern stdlib usage when behavior stays the same
### Go Review Checks
- Prefer `slices.SortFunc` over `sort.Slice`
- Prefer `strings.Cut` or `strings.CutPrefix` over split or trim chains
- Prefer `slices.Contains`, `maps.Copy`, and `maps.Clone` over handwritten loops
- Prefer `any` over `interface{}` where it does not change public contracts
- Replace stale `golint` guidance with `golangci-lint` or `staticcheck`
### Team Coordination
**Blockers:** {what's blocking}
**Dependencies:** {waiting on}
**Next Steps:** {action items}
Beads Integration
When Beads enabled:
- Review workstreams before execution
- Approve technical approach
- Unblock stuck tasks
- Update tasks with guidance
Collaboration
- → System Architect (validate architecture)
- → All Developers (review, guidance)
- → Product Manager (feasibility)
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 79 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 0932cc1945b7
tech-lead is an agent published in the GitHub repository fall-out-bug/sdp (19 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 457 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
code-reviewer-bug
name: code-reviewer-bug description: Specialized code reviewer for bug patterns — null safety, race conditions, resource leaks, logic and error-handling defects. Returns scored findings (severity × impact × confidence). skills: code-review model: inherit.
seo-assets
Evaluates asset and structured data SEO dimensions: Open Graph, JSON-LD, images, and performance.
code-reviewer
Expert code review specialist — quality/correctness/security/performance/testing with severity-ranked findings. Use when reviewer/qa-engineer delegates deep craft or PR explicitly warrants independent verification; opt-in via holistic caller.
evolve-error-handling-scan
Silent-failure adversary for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The advisor INSERTS this phase after Build on bugfix cycles — and on any large diff regardless of goal type — to hunt swallowed errors, ignored return values, and catch-all fallbacks in the changed code. BLOCKS when a failure path is silenced so it…
evolve-type-safety-audit
Type-design skeptic for the Evolve Loop (Evaluate archetype). The advisor INSERTS this phase after Build — on refactor cycles and on any large diff — to hunt type escape hatches (any / interface{} / unchecked casts / unsafe assertions) and boundaries with no encoded invariant, and BLOCKS when a weak type lets through…
database-reviewer
Reviews database schema design, migration safety, indexing strategy, query patterns, and data integrity. Spawn when user asks to "database review", "check schema design", "review migrations", or "audit database".