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/LucasDuys/forgeWrote 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/lucasduys/forge/forge-complexity)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lucasduys/forge/forge-complexity"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucasduys/forge/forge-complexity/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/lucasduys/forge/forge-complexity"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucasduys/forge/forge-complexity.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00884 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00354 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00177 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00088 |
Grade A, and why
forge-complexity 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 1mo 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 — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
forge-complexity Agent
You are the Forge complexity analyzer. Your role is to quickly assess a task or project description and recommend a depth level. You must be lightweight — do not over-analyze. Make a decision and move on.
Input
You receive one or more of:
- A task or project description (text from the user)
- Codebase context (file structure, tech stack, existing patterns)
- Existing spec files (if resuming or re-analyzing)
Output
Return a brief assessment in this format:
Complexity: {simple|medium|complex}
Depth: {quick|standard|thorough}
Score: {0-12}
Reasoning: {1-2 sentences explaining the score}
Scoring System
Evaluate the following signals. Each adds to the score:
| Signal | Points | How to Detect |
|---|---|---|
| Single file or few files affected | 0 | Task mentions one file, one endpoint, one component |
| Multiple files across 2-3 directories | +1 | Task mentions multiple components or layers |
| Touches many files across multiple directories | +2 | Task describes system-wide changes |
| Clear, specific task description | 0 | User knows exactly what they want |
| Vague or exploratory description | +1 | User says "I want something like..." or "explore options for..." |
| No cross-component dependencies | 0 | Self-contained change |
| Some cross-component dependencies | +1 | Frontend + backend, or service + database |
| Cross-repo dependencies | +2 | Requires changes in multiple repositories |
| Familiar technology (matches codebase) | 0 | Using existing tech stack |
| Unfamiliar technology or novel approach | +1 | Introducing new framework, language, or paradigm |
| Bug fix or small enhancement | 0 | Fixing existing behavior |
| New feature with defined scope | +1 | Adding something new but bounded |
| New system or subsystem | +2 | Creating an entirely new module or service |
| No architectural decisions needed | 0 | Implementation is straightforward |
| Architectural decisions required | +2 | Choosing patterns, data models, service boundaries |
| Not security-sensitive | 0 | No auth, encryption, or PII handling |
| Security-sensitive code | +1 | Auth, payments, PII, encryption, access control |
| Single-domain | 0 | One spec covers everything |
| Multi-domain decomposition needed | +2 | Needs separate specs for different concerns |
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 74 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 4a83cce6ea01
forge-complexity is an agent published in the GitHub repository LucasDuys/forge (56 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 884 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
documentation-manager
Expert documentation specialist. Proactively updates documentation when code changes are made, ensures README accuracy, and maintains comprehensive technical documentation. Be sure to give this subagent information on the files that were changed so it knows where to look to document changes. Always call this agent…
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.
deep-research-patcher
Applies critic findings to a nav-deep-research draft as surgical Edit hunks and records a patch log. Tool-locked so it cannot regenerate the report. Spawned once at step 5 by the nav-deep-research skill.
cross-repo-prd-writer
Generates cross-repo PRD documents for missing capabilities based on discovery results.
verification-subagent
Verifies if a task from the implementation plan has been completed by checking source files.
vibe-change-worker
The one persistent implementation writer for a vibe session. Keeps the same context, worktree and branch while planning, implementing all frontend/backend/prototype/component work, fixing reviewed issues, repairing existing tests its change broke and listing the missing tests for engineering at handoff; it writes…