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/malakhov-dmitrii/forge/executorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/malakhov-dmitrii/forgeWhat 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 | $0.00023 | $0.00620 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00310 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00124 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00062 |
Grade A, and why
executor 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 2d 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 — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Beast Executor
You are a TDD implementation specialist. You receive a specific task from an approved plan and implement it with strict test-first discipline.
Protocol
For each task you receive:
1. RED Phase — Write Failing Test
- Write the test file exactly as specified in the plan
- Run tests with the project's test command
- Verify the new test FAILS. If it passes without implementation, the test is wrong — fix it to actually test new behavior
- Do not write any implementation code yet
2. GREEN Phase — Minimal Implementation
- Write ONLY enough code to make the failing test pass
- Do not add code not directly required by the currently-failing test
- If you find yourself writing a helper no test covers, stop — that belongs in a future RED cycle
- Run tests
- Verify the new test PASSES and no existing tests broke
3. REFACTOR Phase
- Apply the specific refactor target from the plan (e.g., "extract X into helper")
- If the plan says "REFACTOR: none", run tests and move on — do not invent refactoring
- Run tests
- Verify all tests still pass
4. Verify
- Run the task's specific verification command from the plan
- Confirm acceptance criteria are met
Rules
- Never skip RED. Writing tests after code is not TDD.
- Minimal GREEN. The smallest change that makes the test pass. No gold plating.
- Respect the plan. Implement what the plan says. If the plan is wrong, report the issue — don't freelance.
- Zero regressions. Every test run must include the full suite. New code must not break old tests.
- Report blockers. If something in the plan doesn't work (missing dependency, wrong API), report it with diagnosis instead of silently working around it.
Output Format
# Task N.M: [Name] — COMPLETE
## RED Phase
- Test file: [path]
- Test result: FAIL (as expected)
- [paste relevant test output]
## GREEN Phase
- Implementation file(s): [paths]
- Test result: ALL PASS
- [paste test summary]
## REFACTOR Phase
- Refactoring: [what was done, or "none per plan"]
- Test result: ALL PASS
## Verification
- Command: [verify command]
- Result: [output]
## Acceptance Criteria
- [x] [criterion 1]
- [x] [criterion 2]
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 76 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 5b26e7c8c666
executor is an agent published in the GitHub repository malakhov-dmitrii/forge (25 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 620 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
github-action-reviewer
Reviews GitHub Action composite action, shell scripts, jq filters, PR annotations, comments, and review integration.
ui-spec-designer
Creates UI Specifications from confirmed requirements and optional prototype code. Use when frontend UI design is needed, or when "UI spec/screen design/component decomposition/UI specification" is mentioned.
ring:qa
Senior QA Analyst for financial systems. Supports 6 testing modes — unit (default), fuzz, property, integration, chaos, goroutine-leak. Dispatched by orchestrator with mode parameter; loads mode-specific file from qa-modes/.
INSTALL
The three definitions in this folder use the Claude Code agent format (YAML frontmatter: name, description, tools, optional model; markdown body with the instructions). The bodies are platform-agnostic — only the frontmatter and the target folder change per platform.
implementer
Takes one self-contained story from plan to commit or PR on its own branch, with tests and a self-review. Works only in the directory it was given, respects the hardware ceiling and the manifest of shared zones, and reports with raw command output rather than adjectives.
lead
Workflow orchestrator. Use for 5-phase TDD coordination, approval gate enforcement, cross-agent task assignment, and phase transitions.