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/si-gmt/secondbrain/mem-archive-expander.templategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SI-GMT/SecondBrainWhat 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 | $0.00102 | $0.00149 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.00075 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00030 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00015 |
Grade A, and why
mem-archive-expander 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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 · 9 lines · 102 tokens per session scan A 445f3699bcde
mem-archive-expander is an agent published in the GitHub repository SI-GMT/SecondBrain (3 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 102 tokens to every session and 149 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
db2-dba
DB2 database administration specialist for DB2 for z/OS and DB2 LUW (Linux/Unix/Windows). Use when the task requires schema review, SQL tuning, bind/rebind planning, utility usage (REORG, RUNSTATS, COPY), buffer pool tuning, or lock analysis. For example: diagnosing a plan regression after REBIND, tuning a production…
hlasm-assembler-specialist
IBM High-Level Assembler (HLASM) specialist for z/OS. Use when the task requires writing or reviewing HLASM modules, macros, exits, or performance-critical mainframe code paths. For example: authoring a user SVC, reviewing a system exit, writing a macro for a shared copybook convention, or diagnosing an S0Cx abend…
performance_engineer
Performance engineering specialist for bottleneck identification, profiling, and optimization. Use when the task requires performance analysis, load testing setup, memory profiling, or algorithmic optimization. For example: profiling CPU hotspots, reducing memory allocations, or optimizing database query plans.
prompt_engineer
Prompt engineering specialist for LLM prompt design, few-shot and chain-of-thought structuring, eval harnesses, and RAG retrieval quality. Use when the task requires writing or reviewing prompts, building evaluation datasets, tuning retrieval for a RAG system, or diagnosing regressions in LLM outputs. For example…
code_reviewer
Code review specialist for identifying bugs, security vulnerabilities, and code quality issues. Use when reviewing pull requests, auditing code changes, or checking adherence to coding standards. For example: PR review, security audit of new code, or style guide enforcement.
wtfp-plan-checker
Determine whether proposed section plans are likely to produce the intended academic outcome. Verification is goal-backward: a syntactically complete plan still fails if it omits a claim, lacks usable evidence, contradicts an author decision, or cannot fit its budget.