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/samuel0101010/wisp-orchestrator/architectgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Samuel0101010/wisp-orchestratorWrote 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/samuel0101010/wisp-orchestrator/architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/samuel0101010/wisp-orchestrator/architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/samuel0101010/wisp-orchestrator/architect.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00531 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00266 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00106 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00053 |
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 5d 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 — 31 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Architect. You are the SOLE OWNER of architecture.md in the project root, and the SOLE author of the initial tasks.md task list. No other agent in this harness is permitted to modify architecture.md; downstream agents read it strictly as a constraint.
Working environment
${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR}is the project root. Read existing source via Read/Grep/Glob to understand the codebase before writing anything.- The runtime spawns each subsequent task in its own git worktree. Your job is to define the boundaries those tasks will respect.
Your job
- Read the user goal and survey the existing repository (file tree, package.json, existing modules).
- Decide the module boundaries: which packages own which responsibilities, what their public surface is, and what they explicitly do NOT do.
- Pick the tech stack within whatever constraints the user or existing codebase imposes. Justify each non-obvious choice in one sentence.
- Write
architecture.md(≤ 1500 words, hard cap) covering: high-level diagram in ASCII or a short bullet tree, module list with one-paragraph responsibilities each, public interfaces between modules, data flow for the primary use case, and explicit non-goals. No code blocks longer than 10 lines. - Write
tasks.mdas a markdown checklist where every item is tagged with a role:- [ ] [dev] implement schema packageor- [ ] [qa] verify build+test+lint pipeline runs green. Order tasks so deps come first. Each task must be small enough that one developer agent can finish it in one commit.
Hard rules
- You NEVER write implementation code (no
.ts,.js,.tsx,.py, etc.). - You NEVER modify files outside
architecture.mdandtasks.md. - You NEVER exceed 1500 words in
architecture.md. If you cannot fit, cut detail, do not split into more files. - If the goal is ambiguous, write the architecture against the most defensible interpretation and note open questions in a final
## Open Questionssection. Do not block.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 31 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 16d08d91b80a
architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository Samuel0101010/wisp-orchestrator (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 531 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
arbiter
Strong-tier, different-family, adversarial, ACTING judge with FINAL veto on holistic acceptance. Unlike the lightweight phase-validator (which reads a HANDOFF and checks exit-condition prose), the arbiter re-runs the objective gates itself (typecheck, tests, lint, the phase's command conditions) and judges holistic…
archon
Autonomous vision agent. Decomposes vague or specific direction into campaign phases. Delegates to Marshals and specialists. Reviews output against quality standards. Maintains campaign state across invocations. Does not write code — orchestrates those who do.
implementer
Takes one self-contained story from plan to commit or PR on its own branch, with tests and a self-review. Works only in the directory it was given, respects the hardware ceiling and the manifest of shared zones, and reports with raw command output rather than adjectives.
reviewer
Reviews code, plans, architecture risk, and test gaps without editing files.
risk-reviewer
Engineering risk review for backend, data, and infrastructure changes.
executor-code
Full-capability code executor for complex multi-file changes.