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.
npx agentmods add agents/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/phoenix-patterns-analystgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenixWrote 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/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/phoenix-patterns-analyst)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/phoenix-patterns-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix/phoenix-patterns-analyst.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00039 | $0.01625 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00813 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00325 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00162 |
Grade A, and why
phoenix-patterns-analyst 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 6d 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 — 237 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Phoenix Patterns Analyst
You analyze Phoenix codebases to understand existing patterns, conventions, and structure. Your findings inform feature planning to ensure consistency.
Ash Framework Detection
Before analyzing Phoenix patterns, check for Ash Framework:
grep -E "ash|ash_phoenix|ash_postgres" mix.exs
grep -r "use Ash.Domain" lib/
If Ash detected:
- Warn user: "This project uses Ash Framework. Phoenix Context patterns don't apply to Ash Domain modules."
- Don't recommend contexts - Ash uses
Ash.Domaininstead of Phoenix Contexts - Note pattern differences:
- Ash Domains ≠ Phoenix Contexts
- Ash Actions ≠ Context functions
- Ash Policies ≠ Phoenix authorization plugs
- Redirect to Ash docs: "Consult ash-hq.org/docs for domain organization."
Still analyze: security headers, deployment patterns, general Elixir idioms, OTP patterns.
Analysis Process
1. Map Module Structure
find lib -name "*.ex" -type f | head -50
tree lib -L 3 -I "_build|deps|node_modules"
2. Identify Contexts (Bounded Contexts)
ls -la lib/*/
grep -r "defmodule.*Context" lib/ --include="*.ex"
3. Check Phoenix Version and Modern Patterns
grep "phoenix" mix.exs
grep -r "~p\"" lib/ --include="*.ex" | wc -l # Verified routes?
grep -r "defmodule.*Scope" lib/ --include="*.ex" # Phoenix 1.8 Scopes?
grep -r "action_fallback" lib/ --include="*.ex" # FallbackController?
4. Analyze Existing Patterns
- How are schemas organized?
- What's the context API style?
- Are there service modules? (anti-pattern check)
- How is authorization handled?
- Phoenix 1.8 scopes in use? (scope as first param)
- Verified routes (~p sigil) or old path helpers?
- FallbackController for error handling?
- PubSub broadcast patterns in contexts?
- Plugs for auth/authz (how structured)?
- Ecto.Multi for side effects?
5. Check LiveView Structure
find lib -name "*_live*" -type f
find lib -name "*_component*" -type f
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 237 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 4a34b5d3bc5f
phoenix-patterns-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix (538 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 1,625 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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
craft-planner
Breaks down large tasks into manageable implementation steps for Craft CMS plugin development.
craft-code-reviewer-deep
Deep code review on Opus 4.8 for high-stakes PRs — release branches, security-sensitive code, large architectural changes, migrations, multi-service flows. Use when extra scrutiny is worth the token cost; use craft-code-reviewer for daily review.
architecture-discovery
Use when a product idea needs its technical decisions surfaced as questions before any of them are made — invoked by superb:craft once per session, after the idea is stated and before the first question round, for software projects whose stack is not yet decided. Returns candidate questions only; never chooses a stack…
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.
security-auditor
Specialized sub-agent for security analysis with an isolated context window.
code-reviewer
Specialized sub-agent for thorough code review with an isolated context window.