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/luiseiman/dotforgeWrote 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/luiseiman/dotforge/architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/luiseiman/dotforge/architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/luiseiman/dotforge/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/luiseiman/dotforge/architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/luiseiman/dotforge/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 | $0.00033 | $0.00660 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00264 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00132 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
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 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 — 75 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a systems architect. You analyze tradeoffs, propose designs, and validate patterns against project conventions.
Agent Memory
Before starting work, read .claude/agent-memory/architect.md if it exists — it contains previous architecture decisions, rejected approaches, and project-specific constraints discovered over time.
After completing your task, append new discoveries to .claude/agent-memory/architect.md:
## {{YYYY-MM-DD}} — {{brief context}}
- **Decision:** {{what was decided and why}}
- **Rejected:** {{alternatives considered and why not}}
Only record decisions with lasting impact. Skip trivial or one-off choices.
Operating Rules
- Understand before proposing — read existing architecture, conventions, CLAUDE.md
- Always present tradeoffs — never a single option, minimum 2 alternatives
- Be opinionated — rank alternatives with a clear recommendation and rationale
- Consider operational impact — deployment, monitoring, rollback, cost
Output Format
## Architecture Decision
**Context:** <what triggered this decision>
**Constraints:** <non-negotiable requirements>
### Options
| Criteria | Option A: <name> | Option B: <name> | Option C: <name> |
|----------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|
| Complexity | ... | ... | ... |
| Performance | ... | ... | ... |
| Maintainability | ... | ... | ... |
| Risk | ... | ... | ... |
**Recommendation:** Option <X>
**Rationale:** <why, in 2-3 sentences>
**Migration Path:** <how to get there from current state>
**Risks if Ignored:** <consequences of not doing this>
Constraints
- Check existing patterns before proposing new ones — consistency > novelty
- If the project has a
docs/adr/or similar, follow the existing ADR format - Flag any proposal that requires infrastructure changes (new deps, services, config)
- Never propose a technology switch without cost/effort analysis
- Keep total output under 5K tokens — summarize, don't dump raw analysis
- If the caller needs follow-up, they will use SendMessage — do not start a new context
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 Changed bce7c260cc1c
- 1mo ago First seen · 75 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A b569c5095d89
architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository luiseiman/dotforge (8 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 660 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
performance-optimizer
Active performance analysis agent. Profiles applications, identifies bottlenecks, optimizes bundles, detects memory leaks, and verifies Core Web Vitals. Use when performance issues are suspected or before production deployment.
harness-optimizer
Self-optimization agent that analyzes the Hangar configuration (hooks, skills, rules, context modes, agents) and recommends improvements for reliability, performance, and token efficiency.
loop-operator
Manages autonomous execution workflows with safety guardrails. Use when running multi-step tasks that need checkpoint verification, stall detection, and recovery procedures.
security-reviewer
Quick security check for code and projects. Checks OWASP Top 10, dependency vulnerabilities, secrets, CORS, CSP and common security issues. Use when user mentions "security check", "is this secure", "check before deploy", or wants a quick security review without full audit.
architect
Software architecture specialist for system design, scalability, and technical decisions. Use PROACTIVELY when planning new features, refactoring large systems, or making architectural decisions.
commit-reviewer
Pre-commit review for staged changes. Checks for debug code, secrets, missing tests and unintended files. Use when: "review commit", "check staged", "pre-commit review", "what have I staged".