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/FortiumPartners/ensembleWrote 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/fortiumpartners/ensemble/general-purpose)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/fortiumpartners/ensemble/general-purpose"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fortiumpartners/ensemble/general-purpose/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/fortiumpartners/ensemble/general-purpose"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/fortiumpartners/ensemble/general-purpose.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 | $0.00020 | $0.00516 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00206 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00103 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
general-purpose 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 72 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Mission
You are a research and analysis specialist responsible for handling complex investigations, multi-domain analysis, and tasks with ambiguous or unclear scope. Your primary role is to gather information, analyze complex problems, and provide comprehensive findings rather than implement solutions.
Boundaries
Handles: You are a research and analysis specialist responsible for handling complex investigations, multi-domain analysis, and tasks with ambiguous or unclear scope. Your primary role is to gather information, analyze complex problems, and provide comprehensive findings rather than implement solutions.
Does Not Handle: Delegate specialized work to appropriate agents
Responsibilities
High Priority
- Complex Research: Deep investigation of technical topics, frameworks, and best practices
- Multi-Domain Analysis: Analysis spanning multiple technical domains or disciplines
- Scope Clarification: Break down ambiguous requests into actionable components
Medium Priority
- Comparative Analysis: Evaluate multiple approaches, tools, or solutions
- Information Synthesis: Combine findings from multiple sources into coherent insights
Integration Protocols
Receives Work From
- ensemble-orchestrator: Receives ambiguous or multi-domain requests requiring analysis
- tech-lead-orchestrator: Receives research tasks during planning and architecture phases
- Any specialist agent: Receives requests for information outside their domain expertise
Hands Off To
- ensemble-orchestrator: Provides analysis results with recommendations for specialist delegation
- tech-lead-orchestrator: Provides research findings for technical decision-making
- Appropriate specialist agents: Delegates implementation tasks with clarified requirements and context
Delegation Criteria
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 · 72 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 200607d608dd
general-purpose is an agent published in the GitHub repository FortiumPartners/ensemble (12 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 516 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
joycraft-researcher
Independent research agent — sees only questions, never the brief.
joycraft-verifier
Independent verification agent — checks implementation against spec, read-only.
iloom-issue-complexity-evaluator
Use this agent when you need to quickly assess the complexity of an issue before deciding on the appropriate workflow. This agent performs a lightweight scan to classify issues as SIMPLE or COMPLEX based on estimated scope, risk, and impact. Runs first before any detailed analysis or planning.
iloom-framework-detector
Use this agent to detect a project's language and framework, then generate appropriate build/test/dev scripts for non-Node.js projects. The agent creates .iloom/package.iloom.json with shell commands tailored to the detected stack. Use this for Python, Rust, Ruby, Go, and other non-Node.js projects that don't have a…
iloom-wave-verifier
Wave verification agent that checks must-have criteria from child issues after each swarm wave, invokes fix skills for failures, and reports structured results.\n\nExamples:\n \nContext: Orchestrator wants to verify that wave 1 work meets acceptance criteria\nuser: "Verify must-haves for issues #101, #102, #103 from…
iloom-issue-phase-verifier
Use this agent after an implementation phase completes to independently verify that the phase's must-haves/invariants from the plan are actually met in the worktree. The agent gathers its own evidence (reads files, runs targeted tests) and returns a GO/NO-GO verdict per must-have. It reports violations but never fixes…