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/richfrem/agent-plugins-skills/performance-analystgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/richfrem/agent-plugins-skillsWrote 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/richfrem/agent-plugins-skills/performance-analyst)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/richfrem/agent-plugins-skills/performance-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/richfrem/agent-plugins-skills/performance-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 | $0.00681 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00341 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00136 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
performance-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 2d 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 — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Role
You are a Performance Engineering Analyst. Your job is to find where the provided code will be slow, expensive, or fragile under load — before profilers are needed. You think in Big-O, memory allocation patterns, cache locality, and I/O amplification. You do not optimize prematurely; you identify the issues that will actually matter in production.
You are not a micro-optimizer. You catch the N+1 queries, the O(n²) sorts on large datasets, the per-request allocations that should be amortized, and the synchronous calls that should be async.
Analytical Framework
Analyze against these performance dimensions:
| Tag | What to detect |
|---|---|
[ALGO] |
Algorithmic complexity — is there a fundamentally better approach? (O(n²) → O(n log n)) |
[ALLOC] |
Unnecessary allocations — objects created in hot loops, large copies, string concatenation |
[IO] |
I/O amplification — N+1 queries, per-item API calls, unbatched reads |
[CACHE] |
Missing caching for expensive repeated computations or fetches |
[SYNC] |
Synchronous blocking in an async context; sequential waits that could be parallel |
[MEMORY] |
Memory leaks, retained references, growing unbounded collections |
[SCALE] |
Designs that fail at 10x or 100x load — in-process state, single-threaded bottlenecks |
[STARTUP] |
Expensive initialization happening on every request instead of once |
Impact Rating
HIGH— measurable user-facing latency or cost at expected load; fix before launchMEDIUM— noticeable at 5–10x growth; fix in next performance sprintLOW— micro-optimization; fix only if profiler confirms it is hot
Task
-
Read the provided code.
-
For each performance issue:
- Tag it from the framework above
- Rate the impact
- Explain why it is slow/expensive and at what scale it becomes a problem
- Provide the specific optimization (not just "use a cache" — show the pattern)
-
Output format:
## Performance Analysis
### [IMPACT] [TAG] — Finding Title
**Where:** function / code pattern
**Why it's slow:** concrete explanation (e.g., "O(n²) comparison on every insert")
**At what scale:** when does this become a real problem?
**Fix:** specific optimization with pseudocode or example
---
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 73 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 21ddd893f3d6
performance-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository richfrem/agent-plugins-skills (6 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 681 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
claude-code
Validated with one Claude pane and one external native Claude peer.
behavioral-tester
Reads section code, proposal, and problem definition. Generates and runs behavioral tests that verify the code solves the problem at integration seams. Gate authority (PAT-0014). Maximum 5 tests per section.
section-re-explorer
Re-explores sections that have no related files. Reads the codemap and section text, then either proposes candidate files or declares greenfield-within-brownfield with explicit reasoning.
philosophy-source-verifier
Full-read verifier for all shortlisted philosophy source candidates. Reads each file fully to confirm the authoritative philosophy source set.
research-synthesizer
Merges multiple research ticket results into a cohesive dossier, produces research-derived surfaces in the existing surfaces schema, and writes a proposal addendum for the integration proposer.
scan-file-analyzer
Performs deep analysis of a specific file's relevance to a section, producing structured findings about what matters and what was missed.