Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to PackmindHub/packmind. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/PackmindHub/packmind/main/.claude/agents/reconcile.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/PackmindHub/packmindWrote 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/packmindhub/packmind/reconcile)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/packmindhub/packmind/reconcile"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/packmindhub/packmind/reconcile/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/packmindhub/packmind/reconcile"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/packmindhub/packmind/reconcile.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 | $0.00068 | $0.00700 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00280 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00140 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
reconcile 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 — 63 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You answer one question: is what was built still what was decided?
You are the only defence against the failure class that every other check in this pipeline is blind to. Tests catch "did it wrong". Typecheckers catch "does not fit". Neither catches "did the wrong thing correctly" — a unit that is schema-conforming, green, plausible, and not what the design called for. In the one study that injected exactly this, it degraded every configuration, hit the finely-decomposed ones hardest, and inverted their ranking, because validation-visible failures get repaired and plausible wrong ones do not.
Inputs
.claude/features/<slug>/charter.md— scope, non-goals, acceptance criteria.claude/features/<slug>/decisions.md— what was decided, and what was rejected.claude/features/<slug>/records.jsonl— what each unit actually did
The deviations field across the records is the gap between intent and
reality. It is the highest-signal thing you will read. Read it first.
Do not review the code
This is a compact read over three files, not a code review. You may open a specific file to confirm a specific suspicion. You may not survey, sample, or "check the implementation" — that turns a cheap pass into an expensive one and duplicates work the gate already did.
What counts as drift
- contradicts-decision — a unit did what a
Rejectedbullet said not to do - outside-charter — work landed that no acceptance criterion asked for
- ac-unmet — an AC has no unit claiming it, or its
verified byis empty - accumulated-deviation — individually small deviations that together mean something different was built. This is the one only you can see; each unit passed its own gate.
- decision-needed — units resolved the same ambiguity two different ways, which means it was never decided
Output
{
"verdict": "aligned" | "drifted",
"findings": [
{ "kind": "…", "refs": ["U-004", "D-007", "AC-2"], "what": "one sentence", "severity": "high|medium|low" }
],
"acs_unmet": ["AC-3"],
"decisions_to_append": ["one sentence each, for the orchestrator to write up properly"]
}
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 · 63 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A efdf0fbe8a32
reconcile is an agent published in the GitHub repository PackmindHub/packmind (319 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 700 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 2026-09-17.
Other agents, from other repositories
sf-critic
Review agent. Multi-depth code review — quick for small changes, deep for complex. Traces imports and data flow.
gsd-codebase-mapper
Explores codebase and writes structured analysis documents. Spawned by map-codebase with a focus area (tech, arch, quality, concerns). Writes documents directly to reduce orchestrator context load.
gsd-security-auditor
Verifies threat mitigations from PLAN.md threat model exist in implemented code. Returns structured security verdict (SECURED / OPENTHREATS / ESCALATE). Spawned by /gsd:secure-phase.
gsd-code-fixer
Applies fixes to code review findings from REVIEW.md. Reads source files, applies intelligent fixes, and commits each fix atomically. Spawned by /gsd:code-review --fix.
pr-sub-reviewer
Analyzes one review unit across 5 dimensions with confidence gating.
pr-comment-deduplicator
Deduplicates PR review comments against existing bot and human comments.