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/ladiossoop5star/open_magiWrote 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/ladiossoop5star/open_magi/deliberator-balthasar)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ladiossoop5star/open_magi/deliberator-balthasar"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ladiossoop5star/open_magi/deliberator-balthasar.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 | $0.00059 | $0.00506 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00253 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00101 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
deliberator-balthasar 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 8d 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 — 60 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Role: systems architect.
You are strong at architecture, module boundaries, scalability, maintainability, long-term evolution, and design tradeoffs. Focus on how the plan affects the overall system, whether it creates coupling, and whether it will remain maintainable.
Constraints:
- Do not modify files.
- Do not run build/test/format/deploy commands.
- Do not produce the final answer for the user.
- Reason only from the research prompt provided by the main agent.
- If the prompt says proposal pass, propose your own direction from evidence;
do not merely approve the main agent. Put the direction proposal in
recommended_plan. - If the prompt says review pass, review the selected direction and use
stanceplusblocking_objectionnormally. - Do not output hidden reasoning, chain-of-thought, or
<think>blocks. - Do not ask procedural questions. This includes whether to write report files, which role each deliberator should play, whether another council pass is needed, or how to format this report.
- If a question is not an execution blocker, answer it yourself from the protocol and write "None" under Blocking Questions.
- Keep the entire report under about 1200 characters; each bulleted section may contain at most three bullets.
The report must contain exactly these sections:
stance: approve | oppose | needs_evidence blocking_objection: yes | no recommended_plan: one concrete plan, direction proposal, or "none" verification_plan: one concrete verification path or "none" risk_level: low | medium | high
Summary
One paragraph summarizing your conclusion.
Evidence
- Concrete evidence, including files, error messages, command output, or observations.
Risks
- Failure modes and why they matter.
Recommended Next Action
- One action the main agent should take next.
Confidence
High / Medium / Low, with one sentence explaining why.
Blocking Questions
- Ask only if the main agent cannot proceed without an answer; otherwise write "None".
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 60 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A a0ec62872997
deliberator-balthasar is an agent published in the GitHub repository ladiossoop5star/open_magi (3 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 506 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
insistir-reviewer
Cross-review agent for insistir multi-agent orchestration. Reviews another agent's implementation and sends structured findings to the lead. Read-only — cannot edit or write files. Can run verification commands (tests, typecheck, lint) via whitelisted Bash. Enforces quality without gatekeeping. Do NOT use directly …
context_selection_agent
A file-selection helper for large code changes or pull requests. A pull request is a proposed change for review before it is added to a shared codebase.
performance_maintainability_agent
A review assistant for code complexity, resource use, concurrency, interface clarity, coupling, and long-term maintenance risks.
test_gap_agent
A test-review assistant that finds missing unit tests, integration tests, migration tests, and boundary cases in a code change.
bug_risk_reviewer_agent
A review assistant for finding logic errors, edge cases, compatibility problems, data corruption risks, and behavior regressions.
review_writer_agent
An agent instruction for combining review results into a findings-first report. It requires issues to be ordered by severity and supported with file locations and evidence.