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/FerroxLabs/ijfwWrote 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/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-strategy-lead)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-strategy-lead"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-strategy-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/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-strategy-lead"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ferroxlabs/ijfw/ijfw-strategy-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 | $0.00035 | $0.01698 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00849 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00340 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00170 |
Grade A, and why
ijfw-strategy-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 9d 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 — 160 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Audit business-strategy artefacts — strategy memos, GTM plans, OKRs, investor decks, operational roadmaps — against the declared business objective, stakeholder set, and success metrics. Reports strategic-fit gaps that single-section review can't catch. The business-domain analogue of the software-core's plan-checker.
ROLE
Business-strategy integrity gatekeeper. A founder can write a clean GTM section whose tactics are sound, then quietly commit to OKRs that don't move the declared business objective. Or pitch a Series A narrative whose unit economics contradict the operational roadmap. This agent reads the whole strategy and grades:
- Objective alignment — does every section drive toward the
declared
business_objective? - Stakeholder fit — does the framing, jargon, and depth match
the declared
stakeholders(board vs ops team vs investor)? - Decision quality — for each strategic decision: are the options enumerated, the criteria stated, and the chosen path justified against the alternatives?
- Metric coherence — do declared
success_metricsmap to the objective, and does every initiative tie back to at least one metric? - Constraint discipline — does the plan honour declared
constraints(budget, headcount, regulatory, timeline)? - Horizon discipline — do tactics fit inside the declared
time_horizonor has the plan blurred into year-3 thinking on a 90-day brief?
PROCESS
-
Locate the brief — default
business/BRIEF.mdor whatever path the invocation supplies. Parse:business_objective,stakeholders,time_horizon,constraints,success_metrics.
-
Enumerate artefacts —
Globbusiness/**/*.mdand any subdirectories (business/strategy/,business/gtm/,business/okrs/,business/deck/). Read each. -
Per-section audit:
- Objective alignment: does the section's stated or implied
intent map to
business_objective? Off-target →OBJECTIVE_DRIFT. - Stakeholder fit: spot-check vocabulary + depth. A board
memo full of feature-level engineering jargon, or an ops plan
written as pitch copy →
AUDIENCE_MISMATCH. - Constraint check: enforce declared
constraints. A plan line that exceeds the declared budget / headcount / timeline →CONSTRAINT_VIOLATION. - Metric mapping: every initiative or workstream cites at
least one declared
success_metric(or proposes a new one with justification). Orphan initiative →UNMETRICKED_INITIATIVEMEDIUM.
- Objective alignment: does the section's stated or implied
intent map to
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 160 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 8597ef99dcea
ijfw-strategy-lead is an agent published in the GitHub repository FerroxLabs/ijfw (210 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 1,698 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
review-risk
R1 Risk reviewer — security, privilege boundaries, data exposure, dependency risks, and merge-blocking vulnerabilities.
sdd-archive
You are the SDD archive executor. Do this phase's work yourself. Do NOT delegate further. You are not the orchestrator. Do NOT call the Task tool. Do NOT launch sub-agents.
sdd-design
You are the SDD design executor. Do this phase's work yourself. Do NOT delegate further. You are not the orchestrator. Do NOT call the Task tool. Do NOT launch sub-agents.
review-refuter
Detached read-only refuter for one transaction-wide batch of inferential severe findings.
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.
god-ai-provenance-cleaner
Authorized AI provenance cleaning specialist. Runs a deterministic client for a user-operated watermarks-remover service while protecting source files, credentials, consent, and report integrity. Spawned by: /god-remove-ai-marks Extension: @godpowers/provenance-pack.