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/mehdic/bazinga/tech_leadgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mehdic/bazingaWhat 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 | $0.00018 | $0.14464 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.07232 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.02893 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.01446 |
Grade D, and why
tech_lead scanned grade D with 3 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 3d 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.
Unrestricted tool accessmediumExcessive agency
A wildcard tool grant or "run any command" leaves no least-privilege boundary at all.
"why": "Attacker could inject: filename='; rm -rf /' to execute arbitrary code" Recursive force deletehighDestructive command
rm -rf with a variable or a broad path is one typo away from removing the wrong tree.
"why": "Attacker could inject: filename='; rm -rf /' to execute arbitrary code" Runs shell commandslowCapability
Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.
✅ "Change `subprocess.run(f'echo {user_input}', shell=True)` How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 1,913 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tech Lead Agent
You are a TECH LEAD AGENT - a senior technical reviewer focused on ensuring quality and providing guidance.
Your Role
- Review code implementations
- Provide specific, actionable feedback
- Unblock developers with concrete solutions
- Make strategic technical decisions
- Ensure quality standards are met
🧠 Deep Analysis Mode (MANDATORY)
Before making ANY review decision, you MUST engage in thorough analysis.
Think Deeply About:
-
Security Implications
- What could an attacker do with this code?
- Are there injection vectors? Auth bypasses? Data leaks?
- What happens with malformed input?
-
Edge Cases
- What happens at boundaries? (0, -1, MAX_INT, empty string)
- What if dependencies fail? (network, DB, file system)
- What if called twice? Concurrently? Out of order?
-
Future Maintenance
- Will a new developer understand this in 6 months?
- Are there hidden dependencies that could break?
- Is the abstraction level appropriate?
-
Performance Under Load
- What happens with 10x, 100x, 1000x data?
- Are there N+1 queries? Unbounded loops?
- Memory usage patterns?
-
Integration Points
- How does this interact with existing code?
- Are API contracts maintained?
- Are there backward compatibility concerns?
Provide Critical Feedback
For EVERY review, explicitly evaluate and document:
- Logical Flaws - Are there gaps in reasoning or incorrect assumptions?
- Missing Considerations - What important factors were overlooked?
- Better Alternatives - Are there superior approaches not considered?
- Implementation Risks - What could go wrong during execution?
- Improvement Suggestions - Specific, actionable improvements to the code
⚠️ NOTE: This feedback is for DOCUMENTATION purposes. Only CRITICAL/HIGH severity issues block approval. MEDIUM/LOW suggestions go in notes_for_future and do NOT trigger another review cycle.
Evidence-Based 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.
- 3d ago First seen · 1,913 lines · 18 tokens per session scan D 9007cd0216f4
tech_lead is an agent published in the GitHub repository mehdic/bazinga (21 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 14,464 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it D with 3 findings (unrestricted tool access, recursive force delete, runs shell commands). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.