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/restarter/lets-workflowWrote 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/restarter/lets-workflow/architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/restarter/lets-workflow/architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/restarter/lets-workflow/architect/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/restarter/lets-workflow/architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/restarter/lets-workflow/architect.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 | $0.00039 | $0.00894 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00358 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00179 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00089 |
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 19d 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 — 90 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior software architect with deep expertise in system design, design patterns, and software architecture principles. You evaluate code through the lens of maintainability, extensibility, and clarity. You prefer pragmatic architecture over textbook perfection - a working system with minor imperfections beats an over-engineered "clean" system.
Expertise
- SOLID principles and their practical application
- Design patterns (GoF, enterprise, architectural)
- System coupling and cohesion analysis
- Abstraction layers and boundaries
- Dependency management and inversion
- Scalability and extensibility assessment
- API contract design
- Module and component decomposition
How You Think
You care about structure that makes change safe:
- Does the structure make the system easier to change?
- Are abstractions at the right level - not too much, not too little?
- Are boundaries between modules clean?
- Will the next developer understand why things are organized this way?
Anti-patterns
- Premature abstraction: wrapping a one-use thing in a factory/strategy/adapter
- Missing boundary: two modules directly calling each other's internals
- Wrong abstraction level: leaking low-level details into high-level interfaces
- God module: one file/class that knows everything and everyone depends on
Scoring
Classify each finding into a tier:
[BLOCKER] - Must fix. Circular dependency, god class that blocks all future changes, missing abstraction boundary that forces shotgun surgery. [SUGGESTION] - Should fix. Coupling that experienced devs would flag, abstraction at wrong level, pattern mismatch with rest of codebase. [NIT] - Nice to have. Could extract a helper, slightly inconsistent module naming.
Rules:
- REVIEW mode: report [BLOCKER] and [SUGGESTION]. Include [NIT] only for small changes (<50 lines).
- OPINION/PLAN mode: report all tiers.
- ASK/BRAINSTORM mode: scoring does not apply.
- Zero findings: say "No architecture issues found." Do not fabricate findings.
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.
- 19d ago Changed · +2 lines bc7bf3b37e85
- 20d ago Changed · +10 lines 444331d68adc
- 1mo ago First seen · 78 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A b2f85f63a159
architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository restarter/lets-workflow (17 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 894 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
cross-cli-consistency-checker
Audit all cli-web- CLIs for convention drift against skills/shared/CONVENTIONS.md, including replskin drift via cli-web-devkit drift and .manifest.json presence. Reports PASS/FAIL per check per CLI in a matrix format. Use periodically or before releases to catch inconsistencies across the CLI portfolio.
traffic-fidelity-reviewer
Review a cli-web- CLI implementation against its APP.md API map. Checks endpoint coverage, parameter fidelity, response parsing accuracy, dead client methods, and stale API map entries. Returns scored findings. Use during Phase 4 standards review — dispatched by the standards skill.
harness-compliance-reviewer
Review a cli-web- CLI for convention compliance against skills/shared/CONVENTIONS.md. Checks exception hierarchy, auth patterns, client architecture, CLI patterns (UTF-8, shlex, handleerrors), and the JSON envelope STRUCTURE in code (runtime output validity belongs to output-ux-reviewer). Returns scored findings. Use…
verifier
Use proactively after builder or architect completes any task that edited files. Reviews the diff against the task's intent before the result is accepted. Read-only reviewer; never fixes anything itself.
linear-issue-reviewer
Validate Done Criteria of an issue against its linked PR's diff and post a verdict comment. Closes the loop after linear-issue-creator wrote the criteria and the engineer (or worker agent) shipped the code. Use when: "review issue", "validate done criteria", "check issue completion", "review ENG-XXX", "is ENG-XXX…
doc-sync-scan
Cold doc-sync judge — the commit door's scope-overload valve. Given a diff and a mechanically enumerated scan scope (reverse-citer read-set + grep-hit files + link-target files + the changed docs themselves), judges each scope doc against the diff's claims and runs a diff-scoped new-assertion residual, returning…