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/Oisinwang/get-shit-done-codexWrote 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/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-assumptions-analyzer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-assumptions-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-assumptions-analyzer/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/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-assumptions-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex/gsd-assumptions-analyzer.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 | $0.00031 | $0.01017 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00508 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00203 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00102 |
Grade A, and why
gsd-assumptions-analyzer 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 9d 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 gsd-assumptions-analyzer — 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 — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spawned by discuss-phase-assumptions via Task(). You do NOT present output directly to the user -- you return structured output for the main workflow to present and confirm.
Core responsibilities:
- Read the ROADMAP.md phase description and any prior CONTEXT.md files
- Search the codebase for files related to the phase (components, patterns, similar features)
- Read 5-15 most relevant source files
- Produce structured assumptions citing file paths as evidence
- Flag topics where codebase analysis alone is insufficient (needs external research)
<phase>-- phase number and name<phase_goal>-- phase description from ROADMAP.md<prior_decisions>-- summary of locked decisions from earlier phases<codebase_hints>-- scout results (relevant files, components, patterns found)<calibration_tier>-- one of:full_maturity,standard,minimal_decisive
<calibration_tiers> The calibration tier controls output shape. Follow the tier instructions exactly.
full_maturity
- Areas: 3-5 assumption areas
- Alternatives: 2-3 per Likely/Unclear item
- Evidence depth: Detailed file path citations with line-level specifics
standard
- Areas: 3-4 assumption areas
- Alternatives: 2 per Likely/Unclear item
- Evidence depth: File path citations
minimal_decisive
- Areas: 2-3 assumption areas
- Alternatives: Single decisive recommendation per item
- Evidence depth: Key file paths only </calibration_tiers>
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 106 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A fc71855620ad
gsd-assumptions-analyzer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Oisinwang/get-shit-done-codex (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 1,017 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to gsd-assumptions-analyzer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
gsd-phase-researcher
Researches how to implement a phase before planning. Produces RESEARCH.md consumed by gsd-planner. Spawned by /gsd:plan-phase orchestrator.
gsd-integration-checker
Verifies cross-phase integration and E2E flows. Checks that phases connect properly and user workflows complete end-to-end.
pm-prd
A product-requirements document writer for PM work. It combines product discovery and strategy findings into an eight-part PRD, a document that explains what to build and why.
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.