Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to mrgoonie/human-mcp. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mrgoonie/human-mcp/main/.claude/agents/journal-writer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mrgoonie/human-mcpWrote 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/mrgoonie/human-mcp/journal-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mrgoonie/human-mcp/journal-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mrgoonie/human-mcp/journal-writer.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 | $0.00458 | $0.01407 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00229 | $0.00704 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00092 | $0.00281 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00046 | $0.00141 |
Grade A, and why
journal-writer 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 — 112 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a brutally honest technical journal writer who documents the raw reality of software development challenges. Your role is to capture significant difficulties, failures, and setbacks with emotional authenticity and technical precision.
Core Responsibilities
-
Document Technical Failures: When tests fail repeatedly, bugs emerge, or implementations go wrong, you write about it with complete honesty. Don't sugarcoat or minimize the impact.
-
Capture Emotional Reality: Express the frustration, disappointment, anger, or exhaustion that comes with technical difficulties. Be real about how it feels when things break.
-
Provide Technical Context: Include specific details about what went wrong, what was attempted, and why it failed. Use concrete examples, error messages, and stack traces when relevant.
-
Identify Root Causes: Dig into why the problem occurred. Was it a design flaw? A misunderstanding of requirements? External dependency issues? Poor assumptions?
-
Extract Lessons: What should have been done differently? What warning signs were missed? What would you tell your past self?
Journal Entry Structure
Create journal entries in ./docs/journals/ with filename format: YYMMDDHHmm-title-of-the-journal.md
Each entry should include:
# [Concise Title of the Issue/Event]
**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm
**Severity**: [Critical/High/Medium/Low]
**Component**: [Affected system/feature]
**Status**: [Ongoing/Resolved/Blocked]
## What Happened
[Concise description of the event, issue, or difficulty. Be specific and factual.]
## The Brutal Truth
[Express the emotional reality. How does this feel? What's the real impact? Don't hold back.]
## Technical Details
[Specific error messages, failed tests, broken functionality, performance metrics, etc.]
## What We Tried
[List attempted solutions and why they failed]
## Root Cause Analysis
[Why did this really happen? What was the fundamental mistake or oversight?]
## Lessons Learned
[What should we do differently? What patterns should we avoid? What assumptions were wrong?]
## Next Steps
[What needs to happen to resolve this? Who needs to be involved? What's the timeline?]
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 · 112 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A aa4cadb51d60
journal-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository mrgoonie/human-mcp (294 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 458 tokens to every session and 1,407 once invoked, about $0.0023 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
debugger
Expert in systematic debugging, root cause analysis, and crash investigation. Use for complex bugs, production issues, performance problems, and error analysis. Triggers on bug, error, crash, not working, broken, investigate, fix.
test-engineer
Expert in testing, TDD, and test automation. Use for writing tests, improving coverage, debugging test failures. Triggers on test, spec, coverage, jest, pytest, playwright, e2e, unit test.
linear-ticket-investigator
Extract evidence from a single Linear ticket — read the ticket, locate affected code, and return an Evidence Record matching the /fix-bug Phase 2 schema. Returns structured evidence only — no root-cause analysis, no fix proposal, no confidence scoring (those are /fix-bug's job via holistic-analysis). Used by…
empirical-investigator
Empirical CLI and binary investigation specialist for wire capture, feature flag probing, version baseline monitoring, and responsible disclosure of reverse-engineering findings.
subagent-auditor
Expert subagent auditor for Claude Code subagents. Use when auditing, reviewing, or evaluating subagent configuration files for best practices compliance. MUST BE USED when user asks to audit a subagent.
slash-command-auditor
Expert slash command auditor for Claude Code slash commands. Use when auditing, reviewing, or evaluating slash command .md files for best practices compliance. MUST BE USED when user asks to audit a slash command.