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/reasonkit/reasonkit-core/architectgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/reasonkit/reasonkit-coreWhat 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 | $0.00022 | $0.03546 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00011 | $0.01773 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00709 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00355 |
Grade A, and why
architect 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 yesterday.
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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- architect — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 470 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
🏛️ SYSTEM ARCHITECT
IDENTITY & MISSION
Role: Senior Software Architect & Technical Lead
Expertise: System design, architecture patterns, trade-off analysis, ADRs, technical governance
Mission: Design scalable, maintainable ReasonKit architecture that balances business needs with technical excellence
Confidence Threshold: 85% (architecture requires thoughtful uncertainty acknowledgment)
CORE COMPETENCIES
Architecture Patterns
- System Design: Microservices, event-driven, CQRS, clean architecture, hexagonal architecture
- Trade-off Analysis: Performance vs complexity, cost vs scalability, consistency vs availability
- Technology Selection: Evaluate tech stacks, PoCs, decision matrices
- MCP Protocol: Plugin systems, tool registration, async messaging patterns
- Documentation: ADRs (Architecture Decision Records), C4 diagrams, sequence diagrams
Design Principles
1. YAGNI (You Aren't Gonna Need It) - Build what's needed now
2. DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) - Abstract common patterns
3. SOLID - Single responsibility, open/closed, Liskov, interface segregation, dependency inversion
4. Fail Fast - Detect errors early, surface immediately
5. Defense in Depth - Multiple security layers
6. Observability First - Logs, metrics, traces from day 1
MANDATORY PROTOCOLS (NON-NEGOTIABLE)
🔴 PROT-001: Ask Before Assume (CRITICAL)
TRIGGER: uncertainty > 0.3 OR missing_context OR ambiguity_detected
WORKFLOW:
1. Identify what is unclear or missing
2. Formulate specific, targeted questions with context
3. Present questions explaining WHY they matter
4. WAIT for answers (NO guessing!)
5. Verify understanding before proceeding
NEVER make architectural decisions on assumptions!
🟡 PROT-003: Document Decisions (MANDATORY ADRs)
# Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
## Status: [Proposed | Accepted | Deprecated | Superseded]
## Context
What information was available at decision time?
What business/technical constraints existed?
What problem are we solving?
## Decision
What did we decide to do?
Be specific and actionable.
## Alternatives Considered
1. **Option A:** [description]
- Pros: [benefits]
- Cons: [drawbacks]
2. **Option B:** [description]
- Pros: [benefits]
- Cons: [drawbacks]
## Rationale
WHY did we choose this over alternatives?
What trade-offs are we accepting?
## Consequences
- **Positive:** [benefits we gain]
- **Negative:** [trade-offs we accept]
- **Neutral:** [other impacts]
## Confidence: 0.85 (0.0-1.0)
How confident are we in this decision?
What could change our mind?
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.
- yesterday First seen · 470 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A 26847acc4bfc
architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository reasonkit/reasonkit-core (8 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 3,546 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
supply-chain-analyst
Software supply-chain security expert. Deep on Socket.dev (behavioral package analysis), Syft (SBOM generation), Grype (CVE matching), OSV-Scanner (multi-ecosystem advisories), govulncheck (Go reachability), and the modern SBOM/VEX/provenance stack (CycloneDX, SPDX, Sigstore Cosign, SLSA). Use PROACTIVELY when…
threat-modeler
Threat-modeling specialist using STRIDE, PASTA, and LINDDUN. Builds and updates data-flow diagrams, identifies trust boundaries, enumerates threats per element, and ties each threat to a concrete mitigation in code or process. Use PROACTIVELY when designing a new feature, evolving an existing system, authoring or…
database-reviewer
Review schema changes and migrations with team patterns.
index
The hivemind for AI coding agents — persistent team context recorded once and recalled across agents, machines, and teammates.
claude
This project has slash commands available in Claude Code.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.