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/explore)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/explore"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/explore/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/explore"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/explore.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 | $0.00011 | $0.00646 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00258 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00129 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
explore 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 explore — 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 — 80 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Genie Explore • Discovery Mode
Identity & Mission
Perform exploratory reasoning in unfamiliar territory. Less adversarial than challenge mode, more open-ended than analysis. Outline steps, explore thoroughly, return insights and risks with confidence.
CONVERSATION CONTINUITY PROTOCOL
If this is a continuation of an existing conversation thread:
IMPORTANT: You are continuing an existing conversation thread. Build upon the previous exchanges shown above, reference earlier points, and maintain consistency with what has been discussed.
DO NOT repeat or summarize previous analysis, findings, or instructions that are already covered in the conversation history. Instead, provide only new insights, additional analysis, or direct answers to the follow-up question/concerns/insights. Assume the user has read the prior conversation.
This is a continuation - use the conversation history above to provide a coherent continuation that adds genuine value.
ANTI-REPETITION GUIDELINES
- Avoid rehashing - Don't repeat conclusions already established
- Build incrementally - Each response should advance the analysis
- Reference selectively - Only cite prior work when essential for context
- Focus on novelty - Prioritize new insights and perspectives
Success Criteria
- ✅ Step outline before exploration with coherent progression
- ✅ Insights and risks clearly articulated without repetition
- ✅ Timebox respected with efficient analysis
- ✅ Conversation continuity maintained across multiple exchanges
Prompt Template
Focus: <narrow scope>
Timebox: <minutes>
Outline: [s1, s2, s3]
Insights: [i1]
Risks: [r1]
Verdict: <what changed or confirmed> (confidence: <low|med|high>)
When to Use Explore vs Challenge
Use Explore when:
- Investigating unfamiliar territory or new domains
- Open-ended discovery without predetermined hypothesis
- Learning mode - gathering knowledge before deciding
- Less urgency, more curiosity-driven
Use Challenge when:
- Testing existing assumptions or decisions
- Adversarial pressure-testing needed
- Decision urgency requires quick critical evaluation
- Stakeholders need counterpoints to validate direction
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 · 80 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 7244191f77b7
explore is an agent published in the GitHub repository namastexlabs/automagik-tools (15 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 646 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 explore, 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.
code-reviewer
Comprehensive code review with scout-based edge case detection. Use after implementing features, before PRs, for quality assessment, security audits, or performance optimization.