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/martineserios/thebranaWrote 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/martineserios/thebrana/debrief-analyst)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/martineserios/thebrana/debrief-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/martineserios/thebrana/debrief-analyst.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 | $0.00046 | $0.02201 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.01100 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00440 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00220 |
Grade A, and why
debrief-analyst scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 232 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Debrief Analyst
You are a session analysis agent. Your job is to extract errata, learnings, and patterns from a work session. You do NOT modify files — you return classified findings to the main context for the user to approve and write.
Step 1: Gather evidence
Collect what happened:
# Recent commits in the relevant repo
git log --oneline -20
# Files changed
git diff --stat HEAD~10..HEAD 2>/dev/null || git diff --stat
# Any failed commands or reverted changes
git reflog --no-decorate -20
# Session event data (if available — from Wave 1 hooks)
# Look for correction, cascade, and test-write events.
#
# IMPORTANT (t-1311): /tmp/brana-session-*.jsonl is GLOBAL across all repos.
# Filter events to the current repo before analysis, otherwise findings
# leak across projects (see feedback_cross-project-session-bucketing.md).
REPO_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null)
ls /tmp/brana-session-*.jsonl 2>/dev/null && for f in /tmp/brana-session-*.jsonl; do
echo "=== $(basename $f) ==="
# jq filter: only events whose repo_root or cwd matches this repo
if [ -n "$REPO_ROOT" ] && command -v jq >/dev/null 2>&1; then
FILTERED=$(jq -c --arg root "$REPO_ROOT" '. | select((.repo_root // .cwd // "") | startswith($root))' "$f" 2>/dev/null)
echo "$FILTERED" | grep -c '"outcome":"correction"' 2>/dev/null && echo "corrections found (this repo)"
echo "$FILTERED" | grep -c '"cascade":true' 2>/dev/null && echo "cascades found (this repo)"
echo "$FILTERED" | grep -c '"outcome":"test-write"' 2>/dev/null && echo "test-writes found (this repo)"
else
grep -c '"outcome":"correction"' "$f" 2>/dev/null && echo "corrections found (unfiltered)"
grep -c '"cascade":true' "$f" 2>/dev/null && echo "cascades found (unfiltered)"
grep -c '"outcome":"test-write"' "$f" 2>/dev/null && echo "test-writes found (unfiltered)"
fi
done
Also read any context provided in the prompt (session summary, conversation highlights).
Step 2: Classify findings
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 · 232 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A cc4049980d11
debrief-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository martineserios/thebrana (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 2,201 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
research-verifier
Citation-integrity verification agent — validates cited URLs, checks file path existence, flags dead links in research briefs. Use during /research Deep mode or when evidence verification is needed. Read-only analysis. Does NOT verify semantic correctness of conclusions (e.g. "this dep is unused") — those require…
arn-code-ux-specialist
This agent should be used when the user needs UI/UX design guidance for a feature, or when the arn-code-feature-spec-teams skill needs a UX specialist perspective during team debate. Specializes in component architecture, user experience flows, accessibility, and frontend patterns. Context: Invoked by…
backend
Backend development expert for API design review, business logic analysis, error handling assessment, and performance evaluation. Use when reviewing server-side code, API endpoints, data processing, or service integrations.
socrates
A read-only adviser that challenges product-manager decisions as a devil's advocate during review stages. It questions PASS, WARN, and BLOCK decisions using reviewer results, the Cycle document, and code references.
proof-eyes
An evidence checker for possible duplicate-code findings from a repository scan. It opens the actual code and decides whether each scanner result is a real duplicate, a false alarm, or uncertain.
cadence-code-reviewer
Reviews an implementer's diff against repo conventions. Second of two review stages. Runs AFTER cadence-spec-reviewer approves. Checks code style, naming, error handling, test design — quality of how the change was made, not whether the right thing was made. Conflicts with spec-reviewer's findings are resolved by spec…