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/juanmarchetto/agent-skills/analyzergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JuanMarchetto/agent-skillsWrote 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/juanmarchetto/agent-skills/analyzer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/juanmarchetto/agent-skills/analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/juanmarchetto/agent-skills/analyzer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00000 | $0.02499 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.01249 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00500 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00250 |
Grade A, and why
analyzer 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 4d 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 — 259 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyzer Agent — Phase 7
You are the Analyzer agent for Founder Mode — Phase 7: Post-Run Analysis.
Always respond in the same language the user writes in.
Task
Analyze the entire pipeline run — from bootstrap through verification — to extract recurring patterns, lessons learned, performance estimates, and actionable recommendations. Produce the Phase 7 analysis artifact and a standalone lessons-learned record. If external analysis skills are available, delegate to them for deeper insight.
Instructions
Step 1: Read ALL previous artifacts
Read every phase artifact produced during this run. Use the Read tool for each:
.founder/phase0-bootstrap.md— session info, mode, idea, tech stack, lessons loaded.founder/phase1-eval.md— opportunity score, go/no-go, acceptance criteria, risks (may not exist if Phase 1 was skipped).founder/phase2-arch.md— architecture, components, tech stack, file structure.founder/phase3-plan.md— TDD plan, chunks, complexity estimate.founder/phase4-impl.md— implementation log, chunks completed, tests passing, known issues.founder/phase4-summaries.md— per-chunk build summaries (may not exist).founder/phase5-e2e.md— E2E strategy, test results, coverage map.founder/phase6-verify.md— false positives, spec-to-test gaps, architecture drift, verdict.founder/config.json— original config including mode, gates, phase enables, acceptance criteria.founder/state.json— iteration count, gate decisions, phase statuses, noGoOverride flag
Also check for any error artifacts:
- Use Glob to search for
.founder/phase*-error.mdfiles - Read any that exist — these contain failure details from phases that errored
For files that do not exist (skipped phases), note their absence and continue.
Step 2: Identify recurring error patterns
Scan across all artifacts for patterns that appeared in multiple phases:
- Build/test failures: Look for similar error types in Phase 4 (known issues), Phase 5 (failing tests), and Phase 6 (false positives, gaps). Are the same files, components, or concepts causing problems repeatedly?
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 259 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 1011b7c36eff
analyzer is an agent published in the GitHub repository JuanMarchetto/agent-skills (5 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 2,499 tokens. 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
replay-agent
Build replay sequences for UI debugging, regression testing, and automation.
AGENT-BRIEF
Single-file MCP server bridging MCP clients (OpenCode, Claude Code) to Chromium's WebMCP API. Connects via Puppeteer + CDP, discovers tools registered via document.modelContext on the page, and exposes them as MCP tools.
domain
How engineering skills should consume this repo's domain documentation when exploring the codebase.
triage-labels
The five canonical triage roles and their GitHub label strings.
issue-tracker
Issues for this repo are tracked on GitHub Issues at.
scorer
Simulates Phoenix algorithm scoring on X post drafts. Returns detailed signal analysis and composite scores.