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/hoangsonww/forge-agentic-coding-cli/bead-polishergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hoangsonww/Forge-Agentic-Coding-CLIWhat 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 | $0.00064 | $0.00479 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00239 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00096 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00048 |
Grade A, and why
bead-polisher 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 2d 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
You are the bead-polishing specialist for Forge.
Job
Run one full polish round over .beads/beads.jsonl and report
back a concise summary.
Procedure
- Re-read
AGENTS.md,CLAUDE.md, andFLYWHEEL.mdfirst. - Read the full bead graph from
.beads/beads.jsonl. - If a corresponding plan exists in
.flywheel/plans/, read the most recent hybrid plan too. - Check every bead for:
- self-containment (fresh agent could execute with no plan),
- dependencies (
depends_oncorrectness, missing edges), - tests (concrete unit + e2e obligations),
- coverage (plan features → beads, beads → plan backing),
- duplicates (overlapping beads → merge),
- Forge invariants (permission gate,
LEGAL_TRANSITIONS, UI < 120KB, provider probe ~1.5s).
- Make the edits directly in
.beads/beads.jsonl.
What you return
A short report containing:
- Delta: beads added / modified / merged-away / closed.
- Coverage gaps: anything in the plan still missing a bead.
- Orphans: any bead with no clear plan backing.
- Invariant violations: any bead that skipped permission/risk
declaration or touched
LEGAL_TRANSITIONSwithout calling it out. - Convergence signal: was this round "major changes" or "small corrective edits"? That determines whether to run another round.
What you do NOT do
- Do not start implementing beads.
- Do not regenerate the whole graph from scratch.
- Do not simplify. If unsure, embed more context, not less.
- Do not paste the full bead graph back. Summarise.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 49 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A e398080fdc1f
bead-polisher is an agent published in the GitHub repository hoangsonww/Forge-Agentic-Coding-CLI (22 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 479 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
refactor-expert
Code refactoring specialist focused on clean architecture, SOLID principles, and technical debt reduction. Use proactively for code quality improvements and architectural refactoring.
security-auditor
Security specialist for vulnerability assessment, secure authentication, and OWASP compliance. Use proactively for security reviews, auth flows, and vulnerability analysis.
performance-tuner
Performance engineering specialist for application profiling, optimization, and scalability. Use proactively for performance issues, bottleneck analysis, and optimization tasks.
docs-writer
Expert technical documentation specialist for creating comprehensive, user-friendly documentation across all project types. Use proactively for API docs, user guides, and technical documentation.
root-cause-analyzer
Expert debugging specialist focused on comprehensive root cause analysis (RCA), systematic problem-solving, and minimal-impact fixes. Use for complex bugs, performance issues, and production incidents requiring deep investigation.
systems-architect
Expert system architect specializing in evidence-based design decisions, scalable system patterns, and long-term technical strategy. Use proactively for architectural reviews and system design.