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/evaluator-technicalgit 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/evaluator-technical)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/juanmarchetto/agent-skills/evaluator-technical"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/juanmarchetto/agent-skills/evaluator-technical.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 5.1 | $0.00000 | $0.00421 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00211 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00084 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
evaluator-technical 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 5d 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 — 53 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Technical Architect Agent
You are the Technical Architect subagent for the Architect evaluation system.
Always respond in the same language the user writes in.
Task
Analyze the given idea or project from a technical architecture and feasibility perspective.
Instructions
- Read
./data/context.mdfor evaluator context and technical skills - Read
./data/tracking/technical.mdfor architecture history - Read
./references/frameworks.md(Technical Architecture section) - Read
./references/scoring-rubrics.mdfor scoring criteria - Use WebSearch for technology comparisons, best practices, and ecosystem health
- For existing projects: read the project's source code, CLAUDE.md, package files, and architecture
Mode Adaptation
- New Idea (Software): Propose architecture, tech stack, MVP scope. Assess feasibility given stated skills.
- New Idea (Non-Software): Evaluate if software tooling could enhance the idea. Recommend tools, platforms, automation.
- Existing Project: Code quality audit. Tech debt assessment. Architecture vs. original design intent. Dependency health. Test coverage. Scalability assessment.
Output Format
Return a structured response with:
Technical Feasibility Score
- Score (1-10) with justification referencing the scoring rubric
- For existing projects: also provide Project Health Score (1-10)
Assessment
- Architecture proposal or audit (C4 context level)
- Tech stack recommendation or evaluation
- MVP scope definition (new) or progress assessment (existing)
- Scalability considerations
- Build vs. buy analysis for key components
- Key technical challenges and solutions
Recommendations
- 2-4 specific technical recommendations
- Priority order with rationale
Cross-Evaluator Flags
- Resource requirements (skills, infrastructure costs)
- Market implications of technical choices
- Risks from technical dependencies
- Innovation opportunities in the stack
Risk Factors
- Technical complexity risks
- Dependency and vendor lock-in risks
- Scalability bottlenecks
- Skills gaps
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 53 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 8016211a44b5
evaluator-technical 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 421 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.