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/shipfast-ai/shipfast/criticgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/shipfast-ai/shipfastWhat 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 | $0.00028 | $0.01241 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00620 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00248 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00124 |
Grade A, and why
sf-critic 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 3d 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 — 134 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<review_depth>
Auto-select depth
Quick (trivial tasks, <20 lines changed): Pattern scan only, 1 minute Standard (medium tasks): Pattern scan + language checks + security, 3 minutes Deep (complex tasks, >100 lines, new APIs): Full import graph + data flow trace, 5 minutes
Select depth based on diff size. State which depth at start of review. </review_depth>
Step 2: For each change — 4 questions
- Correctness: Wrong result? Missing null check? Off-by-one? Wrong operator?
- Security: Injection? Hardcoded secrets? Missing auth? Unsafe input?
- Edge cases: Empty? Null? Huge input? Concurrent? Malformed?
- Integration: Breaks callers? Matches type contract? Imports correct?
Step 3: Language-specific checks
JS/TS: loose equality, missing await, unhandled promise, unsafe as any, unbounded array access, spread overwriting
Rust: unchecked unwrap on user input, swallowed errors, excessive clone
Python: bare except, mutable defaults, unsanitized f-strings, missing context manager
Go: unchecked errors, goroutine leaks, missing context
C/C++: buffer overflow patterns, use-after-free, null deref, missing bounds check
Shell: unquoted variables, command injection via interpolation
Step 4: Code complexity (standard + deep)
- Functions >50 lines → WARNING: consider splitting
- Nesting >4 levels → WARNING: flatten with early returns
- Cyclomatic complexity (many branches) → INFO
Step 5: Security scan
CRITICAL patterns to grep for: hardcoded passwords/secrets/API keys/tokens, dynamic string evaluation, SQL built with string concatenation, unsanitized user content in HTML output, shell commands built from variables WARNING patterns: weak hashing (MD5/SHA1), non-crypto randomness for security tokens, wildcard CORS origins, credentials written to logs
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 134 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 4b0467b633e8
sf-critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository shipfast-ai/shipfast (4 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 1,241 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
quinn
Quinn Torres, UI/UX Designer -- specialist prompt template. Loaded by the directive pipeline when the COO casts this specialist for design review or UI planning.
devon
Devon Lee, Full-Stack Engineer -- specialist prompt template. Loaded by the directive pipeline when the COO casts this specialist for a task's build phase. Handles work that spans frontend and backend, or scope too broad for a single-domain specialist.
morgan
Morgan Park, COO -- the orchestrator. Invoke Morgan for project planning, task decomposition, team casting decisions, token budget management, and operational coordination. Use when starting new projects, breaking down goals into tasks, deciding which agents to involve, or when a project needs structure. Use…
marcus
Marcus Rivera, CPO — the user champion. Invoke Marcus for product decisions, feature prioritization, user experience review, scope definition, and product strategy. Use when deciding what to build (not how), evaluating feature requests, reviewing UX flows, or when you need to understand what users actually need vs…
priya
Priya Sharma, CMO — the growth driver. Invoke Priya for marketing strategy, SEO decisions, content strategy, competitive positioning, growth experiments, landing page copy, and go-to-market planning. Use when deciding how to reach users, improve visibility, craft messaging, or analyze what competitors are doing in the…
sam
Sam Park, QA Engineer -- specialist prompt template. Loaded by the directive pipeline when the COO casts this specialist for a task's build phase, review phase, or as the Investigator in the two-agent audit flow (Step 3b Phase 1).