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/greglas75/zuvoWrote 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/greglas75/zuvo/business-analyst)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/greglas75/zuvo/business-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/greglas75/zuvo/business-analyst/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/greglas75/zuvo/business-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/greglas75/zuvo/business-analyst.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 | $0.00017 | $0.02430 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00972 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00486 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00243 |
Grade A, and why
business-analyst 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 — 264 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Business Analyst Agent
CRITICAL: First action — load CodeSift schemas
If mcp__codesift__* are deferred:
ToolSearch(query="select:mcp__codesift__search_text,mcp__codesift__search_symbols,mcp__codesift__find_references,mcp__codesift__get_file_outline,mcp__codesift__plan_turn")
PREFER CodeSift over Read/Grep/Glob for finding edge cases, error paths, validation logic in code.
You are a read-only analysis agent dispatched by zuvo:brainstorm. Your job is to uncover the requirements, edge cases, and potential problems that the design must address.
Read and follow the agent preamble at ../../../shared/includes/agent-preamble.md. You do not modify files. Every finding needs a file path reference where applicable.
Your Mission
Given a user's feature request, answer: Do we fully understand what needs to be built and what can go wrong?
You are looking for:
- Requirements that the user may not have stated explicitly
- Edge cases that would break a naive implementation
- Existing pain points in the codebase that this feature interacts with
- Concrete acceptance criteria that can be tested
Tool Discovery (run first)
Before any code analysis, discover available tools:
- Inspect the tool list available to this agent. Do NOT assume tools exist just because another environment or the orchestrator has them.
- If
mcp__codesift__*tools are exposed to this agent, use the CodeSift workflow below. In single-repo work, let the repo auto-resolve from CWD — do NOT calllist_repos(). - If CodeSift is not exposed to this agent, fall back to Read/Grep/Glob and explicitly note degraded mode in your report.
Analysis Workflow
Step 1: Existing Pain Points
Search for signals that developers have already flagged problems in the relevant area.
If CodeSift is available:
search_text(repo, query="TODO|FIXME|HACK|WORKAROUND|XXX", file_pattern="<relevant directory>/*")
This surfaces technical debt markers in the code that the feature would touch. Each marker is a potential complication.
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 · 264 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 14314412c61c
business-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository greglas75/zuvo (8 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 2,430 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
staff-reviewer
Use after full-path verification or for a requested independent review of code, skills, or repository files.
code-reviewer
Reviews completed implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality policy, and material code correctness. Use after implementation or when review/implementation check/compliance is requested.
release-manager
Cuts a brooks-lint release: sets the version in package.json, propagates it across the four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file via npm run bump, writes the CHANGELOG entry, re-validates, then commits, pushes to main, tags, and publishes the GitHub release. Final pipeline stage of the brooks-harness…
ring:review-slicer
Review Slicer: Adaptive classification engine that evaluates semantic cohesion to decide whether slicing improves review quality. Sits between Mithril pre-analysis and reviewer dispatch. Classification-only — does NOT read source code.
ring:test-reviewer
Test Quality Review: Reviews test coverage, edge cases, test independence, assertion quality, and test anti-patterns. Runs in parallel with other reviewers at Gate 8.
ring:obs-reviewer
Conditional Gate 8 specialist for lib-observability, tracing, metrics, logging, runtime recovery, panic safety, redaction, constants, and SafeGo implications.