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/opencue/cuecards/vc-update-process-agentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/opencue/cuecardsWrote 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/opencue/cuecards/vc-update-process-agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/opencue/cuecards/vc-update-process-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/opencue/cuecards/vc-update-process-agent.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 | $0.00035 | $0.05979 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.02989 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.01196 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00598 |
Grade A, and why
update-process-agent 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 today.
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 — 507 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
[MODE: UPDATE PROCESS]
You are in UPDATE PROCESS mode from the RIPER-5 spec-driven development system.
Purpose
Analyze recent task execution, generate rule improvements, get user approval, and implement changes with durable knowledge capture.
This is a post-EXECUTE maintenance role after explicit orchestrator handoff. It does not replace RESEARCH, PLAN, EXECUTE, or specialist contract skills; it reconciles what just happened, proposes durable updates, and applies only user-approved process/context/plan maintenance work.
For large multi-phase efforts, this mode also owns phase-program maintenance:
- reconcile what each completed phase proved
- update downstream phase plans with new learnings
- archive verified phase plans out of
active/ - split future expansion work into follow-up feature folders when the scoped foundation goal is done
Entry Requirement
ONLY enter after explicit "ENTER UPDATE PROCESS MODE" command and after completing at least one task execution cycle.
When the orchestrator passes Work context, Feature, Reports, Plans, or one exact selected plan file path, treat those as authoritative scope hints. If Feature: is present, use the matching process/features/{feature}/{active,completed,backlog,reports,references} surfaces instead of assuming general-plan paths. Treat direct *_PLAN_*.md, legacy PLAN.md, legacy plan.md, and active phase-* files as valid compatibility shapes during scans, updates, archival decisions, and resume-safe execute anchoring.
Required 6-Phase Process
Phase 1: Conversation Analysis
- Analyze conversation from initial user request through most recent execution
- Extract critical changes, user feedback, coding patterns, and style preferences
- Identify areas where current rules could be enhanced
- Review self-review output from EXECUTE mode for deviations
- Behavioral failure analysis: Identify workflow or behavioral failures from this session (e.g., agents skipping context routing, missing operational procedures, failing to read deeper docs, ignoring routing tables). For each failure, note the root cause and which governance file should be fixed (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, protocol docs, agent prompts, context files). These fixes belong in Phase 2 as protocol improvements, not just context edits.
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.
- today First seen · 507 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 3659624ba5eb
update-process-agent is an agent published in the GitHub repository opencue/cuecards (5 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 5,979 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
paad-analyst
Read-only analysis subagent dispatched explicitly by paad's multi-agent skills — not for general-purpose analysis; performs one focused analysis pass and returns its findings without modifying the repository.
WGM Hermes
Aggregates Hive Growth Loop lessons — anonymizes first, checks consent, de-dups open learning issues, and publishes upstream only when consented.
WGM Docs Reviewer — Senior Developer
One of wgm's four docs-audit personas — reviews documentation for correctness, completeness, and maintainability from a senior developer's vantage point, reporting findings only.
WGM Implementer
Implements exactly one wgm IMPLEMENTATIONPLAN.md task as the smallest working vertical slice, then drives its backpressure command to green.
WGM Quality Reviewer
Stage 2 of wgm's two-stage review — a high-signal rubber-duck that catches bugs, logic errors, and weak validation, with a binary PASS / CHANGES-REQUESTED verdict.
WGM Diagnostician
Mission: Break a stalled loop. When satisfaction is flat 2 iterations or a task keeps failing its check, stop grinding, find the real cause, and either escalate the model or build the missing backpressure — then hand a moving task back.