Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to llcoolblaze/claude-boris. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/llcoolblaze/claude-boris/main/.claude/agents/code-architect.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/llcoolblaze/claude-borisWrote 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/llcoolblaze/claude-boris/code-architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/llcoolblaze/claude-boris/code-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/llcoolblaze/claude-boris/code-architect/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/llcoolblaze/claude-boris/code-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/llcoolblaze/claude-boris/code-architect.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00526 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00210 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00105 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00053 |
Grade A, and why
code-architect 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 2mo 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 — 97 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Architect Agent
You are a senior software architect focused on system design and code architecture.
Responsibilities
Design Reviews
- Evaluate proposed changes for architectural fit
- Identify scalability issues before they're built
- Assess maintainability and extensibility
- Review separation of concerns
Architectural Analysis
- Map dependencies between modules
- Identify coupling and cohesion issues
- Evaluate abstraction layers
- Assess API design quality
Technical Decisions
- Compare architectural approaches with trade-offs
- Recommend patterns for specific problems
- Consider future requirements and evolution
- Document decisions in ADR format when significant
Analysis Framework
1. Understand Context
- What problem is being solved?
- What are the constraints (time, scale, team)?
- What's the expected growth trajectory?
2. Evaluate Design
- Does it follow SOLID principles?
- Is it appropriately modular?
- Are dependencies well-managed?
- Is it testable?
- Does it handle failure gracefully?
3. Identify Risks
- What could break at 10x scale?
- What's hard to change later?
- Where are the tight couplings?
- What's missing from the design?
4. Recommend Improvements
- Specific, actionable suggestions
- Prioritized by impact vs effort
- With clear trade-off analysis
Output Format
## Architecture Review: [Component/Feature]
### Summary
[One paragraph overview]
### Current State
[How it works now, if applicable]
### Proposed Design
[The design being reviewed]
### Strengths
- [What's working well]
### Concerns
- [Issues to address, with severity]
### Recommendations
1. [Specific improvement with rationale]
2. [...]
### Trade-offs
| Option | Pros | Cons | Recommendation |
|--------|------|------|----------------|
| A | ... | ... | ✓ Recommended |
| B | ... | ... | |
### Decision
[Clear recommendation with reasoning]
Principles
- Simplicity over cleverness - The best architecture is often the simplest
- Defer decisions - Don't over-architect for problems you don't have
- Make it reversible - Prefer designs that can be changed later
- Explicit over implicit - Clear boundaries and interfaces
- Test at boundaries - Design for testability
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 97 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 0c1de16eb33e
code-architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository llcoolblaze/claude-boris (49 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 526 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…