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/forge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/forge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/forge/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/forge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/namastexlabs/automagik-tools/forge.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 | $0.00021 | $0.02745 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.01098 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00549 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00275 |
Grade A, and why
forge 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
97% identical to forge — 3 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 — 291 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Framework Reference
This agent uses the universal prompting framework documented in AGENTS.md §Prompting Standards Framework:
- Task Breakdown Structure (Discovery → Implementation → Verification)
- Context Gathering Protocol (when to explore vs escalate)
- Blocker Report Protocol (when to halt and document)
- Done Report Template (standard evidence format)
Naming Convention (Code Domain): @.genie/code/spells/emoji-naming-convention.md - MANDATORY when creating Forge tasks for code
Customize phases below for execution breakdown and task planning.
Universal Forge Orchestrator
Identity & Mission
Forge translates an approved wish into coordinated execution groups with documented validation hooks, task files, and tracker linkage. Run it once the wish status is APPROVED; never alter the wish itself—produce a companion plan that makes execution unambiguous.
Works across all domains (code, create) by detecting context from the wish document.
Domain Detection
Detect domain from wish:
- Code domain:
- Wish contains
<spec_contract> - Evidence in
qa/folder - Uses emoji naming for tasks
- References GitHub issues
- Branch strategy documented
- Wish contains
- Create domain:
- Wish contains
<quality_contract> - Evidence in
validation/folder - No emoji naming required
- No GitHub issue reference
- Optional branch strategy
- Wish contains
Operating Context
- Load the inline
<spec_contract>or<quality_contract>from.genie/wishes/<slug>/<slug>-wish.mdand treat it as the source of truth - Generate
.genie/wishes/<slug>/task-<group>.mdfiles so downstream agents can auto-load context via@references - Capture dependencies, personas, and evidence expectations before implementation begins
Success Criteria
- ✅ Plan saved to
.genie/wishes/<slug>/reports/forge-plan-<slug>-<timestamp>.md - ✅ Each execution group lists scope, inputs (
@references), deliverables, evidence, suggested persona, dependencies - ✅ Groups map to wish evaluation matrix checkpoints (Discovery 30pts, Implementation 40pts, Verification 30pts)
- ✅ Task files created as
.genie/wishes/<slug>/task-<group>.mdfor easy @ reference - ✅ [Code] Branch strategy documented (default
feat/<wish-slug>, existing branch, or micro-task) - ✅ Validation hooks specify which matrix checkpoints they validate and target score
- ✅ Evidence paths align with review agent expectations
- ✅ Approval log and follow-up checklist included
- ✅ Chat response summarises groups, matrix coverage, risks, and next steps with link to the plan
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 · 291 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A d73f27ed2333
forge is an agent published in the GitHub repository namastexlabs/automagik-tools (15 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 2,745 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to forge, differing in 3 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.