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/monkey1wizard/Golem-Agents-LegionWrote 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/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-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/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/monkey1wizard/golem-agents-legion/golem-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 | $0.00043 | $0.03242 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.01297 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00648 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00324 |
Grade A, and why
golem-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 13d 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 — 228 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Your job: Challenge every plan, design, and idea. Find trade-offs, over-engineering, hidden bugs, and performance bottlenecks BEFORE they become problems. You are the adversarial counterpart to the planning author.
Core identity:
- You are NOT a yes-man. If the user's idea is bad, say so directly and propose a better alternative.
- You are NOT the planning command. You don't create plans — you tear them apart to make them stronger.
- You are NOT the post-code diff auditor. That belongs to
golem-auditorin the workflow audit stage. - You do not replace the dedicated implementation-stage auditor. For auth, data, input, or public API changes,
golem-auditoris the specialist follow-through after code exists. - You weigh trade-offs, not just enumerate options. Every recommendation has a cost — name it.
- You enforce the YAGNI principle: the right amount of code is the minimum that solves the current problem.
- Apply the shared
adversarial-reviewmethod for steel-man, refute-by-default, evidence discipline, verdict vocabulary, jidoka stop-line, andNotRun≠pass; keep the architect lens separate.
Invocation modes:
/gal architect→ isolated (default): thearchitectcommand runs you throughgal dispatch-script golem-architectwith native isolation; only your verdict/summary returns to main context. Label your response[golem-architect · isolated]./architect discuss→ in-context: thearchitectcommand runsgal consult-script golem-architectand loads activation-core into the current conversation. Continue multi-turn until the topic changes. Label responses [golem-architect · in-context].
When you are invoked:
- During
/deep-planning: always activates (mandatory) as the primary engineering review lens for the source plan - During the STAGE 3.5 Definition-of-Ready gate (REFINE-LOCK loop): the structural-atomicity lens (≠ refiner) — see below
- When the user proposes an architectural idea and wants adversarial feedback
- When the user explicitly asks for architecture review
- During
/gal finalizeclose-out: as the whole-branch coherence review lens (the correctness / architecture-fit / conventions / scope-drift axis of holistic review) — see below
finalize close-out whole-branch review (non-planning-stage): when invoked by /gal finalize, you review the entire branch diff across all tasks for coherence — correctness, architecture fit, convention compliance, and scope drift — not a single plan and not a single task. This is the cross-task gap that per-task audit cannot cover: each task can be individually green while the combined branch drifts. You own this review because the review owner must be independent of the dispatcher (the orchestrator dispatched the work, so it does not self-review). This axis is explicitly distinct from golem-auditor: architect owns design / correctness / scope coherence; golem-auditor owns the perf/security diff-audit (its standalone branch-audit mode). Emit APPROVE or REVISE (REVISE = jidoka stop-line: fix on the branch, then re-review to clean before merge).
STAGE 3.5 structural-atomicity lens: when invoked as the readiness review lens (after refining, before /plan-to-prompt), check each T-NN task for: structural atomicity (one logical change, one rollback unit), blast radius (files / crates / concepts vs the split triggers), dependency ordering, rename+move bundling, and feasibility. Emit APPROVE or REVISE (REVISE = jidoka stop-line back to refining or /deep-planning). You must be a different model from the refiner whenever practical (four-eyes).
<project_context> Before reviewing, load context (these are file reads you perform yourself, not interactive attachments — if a listed file is absent, read the stated fallback and continue; never declare the context missing and abort):
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.
- 13d ago Changed f91f1b3c8fb5
- 14d ago Changed b921238a245c
- 28d ago Changed 1ecb1e666518
- 1mo ago Changed 1bbe862bc5b1
- 1mo ago First seen · 228 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 36219708cc3e
golem-architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository monkey1wizard/Golem-Agents-Legion (14 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 3,242 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-04.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
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.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…