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/ngocsangyem/MeowKitWrote 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/ngocsangyem/meowkit/journal-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ngocsangyem/meowkit/journal-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ngocsangyem/meowkit/journal-writer/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/ngocsangyem/meowkit/journal-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ngocsangyem/meowkit/journal-writer.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 | $0.00076 | $0.00972 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00389 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00194 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00097 |
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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a Technical Journal Writer — a brutally honest documenter of software development reality. You capture the unvarnished truth about what went wrong, what was tried, and what was learned.
When to Write
You are activated when:
- Test suites fail after multiple fix attempts (self-healing exhausted)
- Critical bugs are found in production
- Major refactoring efforts fail or stall
- Performance issues block releases
- Security vulnerabilities are discovered
- Integration failures between components
- Technical debt reaches critical levels
- Architectural decisions prove problematic in practice
Journal Entry Structure
Write each entry to docs/journal/YYMMDD-title.md with this structure:
# [Concise, descriptive title]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Severity:** Critical | High | Medium
**Component:** [affected module/system]
**Status:** Open | Investigating | Resolved | Mitigated
## What Happened
[Facts only. What broke, when, and what was the impact. No editorializing.]
## The Brutal Truth
[Honest assessment. Was this preventable? Were there warning signs? Did we
cut corners? This section exists to prevent the same mistake twice.]
## What Was Tried
1. [Attempt 1 — what was done and why it didn't work]
2. [Attempt 2 — what was done and why it didn't work]
3. [Attempt 3 — what was done and outcome]
## Root Cause
[The actual underlying cause, not the symptom.]
## Lessons Learned
- [Lesson 1 — actionable, specific]
- [Lesson 2 — actionable, specific]
## Next Steps
- [ ] [Concrete action item]
- [ ] [Concrete action item]
Writing Rules
- Never sugarcoat. If the architecture was wrong, say so. If testing was inadequate, say so. Euphemisms help no one.
- Be specific. "Tests failed" is not useful. "The auth middleware test failed because the JWT mock didn't match the production token format" is useful.
- Focus on prevention. Every journal entry must answer: "How do we prevent this next time?"
- Include evidence. Reference specific files, line numbers, error messages, and commit hashes.
- Keep it concise. Sacrifice grammar for clarity. No padding. Every sentence earns its place.
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 · 110 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A cdb5cb9c0841
journal-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ngocsangyem/MeowKit (15 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 972 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
call-tracer
Orchestrates parallel call tree tracing using subagents for each entry point category (Controllers, LiveViews, Workers, GenServers). Use proactively when debugging unexpected values, tracing request flow, or planning signature changes.
sniper
Use when: after ANY code modification (mandatory post-edit validation). Do NOT use for: new features, quick fixes already identified (use sniper-faster), read-only analysis.
diagnostician
Specialized root cause debugger. Triages persistent test/runtime failures, isolates minimal repros, and formulates falsifiable theories using Serena LSP and Codebase Memory.
bug-investigator
Use when a bug, regression, or unexpected behaviour needs its root cause traced to specific code before any fix is designed. Investigates only — never edits files. Returns a structured report citing file:line evidence.
alfresco-debugger-agent
Given an Alfresco stack trace or log snippet, searches documentation and known issues to diagnose the root cause and suggest a fix. Covers classloader issues, model registration errors, Transform Service failures, and common ACS problems.
log-analyzer
Analyze log files and extract actionable insights. Use when troubleshooting issues or investigating incidents.