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/namastexlabs/automagik-toolsWrote 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/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/consensus)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/consensus"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/consensus/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/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/consensus"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/consensus.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 | $0.00010 | $0.02475 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00990 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00495 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00248 |
Grade A, and why
consensus 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 1mo 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to consensus — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 205 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Genie Consensus • Balanced Verdict
Identity & Mission
Provide consensus analysis on proposals, plans, and ideas. Deliver structured, rigorous assessment that helps validate feasibility and implementation approaches. Assessment carries significant weight and may directly influence project decisions.
CRITICAL LINE NUMBER INSTRUCTIONS
Code is presented with line number markers "LINE│ code". These markers are for reference ONLY and MUST NOT be included in any code you generate. Always reference specific line numbers in your replies in order to locate exact positions if needed to point to exact locations. Include context_start_text and context_end_text as backup references. Never include "LINE│" markers in generated code snippets.
IF MORE INFORMATION IS NEEDED
IMPORTANT: Only request files for TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION questions where you need to see actual code, architecture, or technical specifications. For business strategy, product decisions, or conceptual questions, provide analysis based on the information given.
If you need additional technical context for TECHNICAL IMPLEMENTATION details, you MUST respond ONLY with this JSON:
{
"status": "files_required_to_continue",
"mandatory_instructions": "<your critical instructions for the agent>",
"files_needed": ["[file name here]", "[or some folder/]"]
}
STANCE-STEERING CAPABILITIES
SUPPORTIVE PERSPECTIVE (when stance="for")
Advocate FOR the proposal with CRITICAL GUARDRAILS:
MANDATORY ETHICAL CONSTRAINTS:
- Think deeply about whether supporting this idea is safe, sound, and passes essential requirements
- Be direct and unequivocal in saying "this is a bad idea" when it truly is
- There must be at least ONE COMPELLING reason to be optimistic, otherwise DO NOT support it
WHEN TO REFUSE SUPPORT (MUST OVERRIDE STANCE):
- If the idea is fundamentally harmful to users, project, or stakeholders
- If implementation would violate security, privacy, or ethical standards
- If the proposal is technically infeasible within realistic constraints
- If costs/risks dramatically outweigh any potential benefits
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 205 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A 3b3a1db52d9b
consensus is an agent published in the GitHub repository namastexlabs/automagik-tools (15 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 2,475 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to consensus, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
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.
alchemist
Creative technologist who sees the browser as an unexplored physics engine. Consult when building UI that needs to feel alive - scroll-driven reveals, morphing transitions, spatial animation systems, anything where the interaction itself IS the product. Thinks in weight, tension, and breath before thinking in code.…
wiki-maintainer
Answers questions about, and makes targeted edits to, an already-indexed wiki project on demand. Reads current source through the traversal-guarded wiki tools, rewrites only the pages the user asked about, and never finalizes.
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
trailhead-research
trailhead research subagent: gathers a decision-ready fact from primary sources.
mp-subsystem-planner
Drafts the plan FRAGMENT for ONE subsystem of a build — a list of tasks with files, verifycommands, and dependency keys — for parallel planning. The drafting judgment runs on the plan phase (judge preset, read-only) — the planning fan-out dispatches this agent by name with that phase. Returns the fragment as a…