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/srnichols/plan-forgeWrote 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/srnichols/plan-forge/performance-analyzer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/srnichols/plan-forge/performance-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/srnichols/plan-forge/performance-analyzer/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/srnichols/plan-forge/performance-analyzer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/srnichols/plan-forge/performance-analyzer.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 | $0.00026 | $0.00837 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00335 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00084 |
Grade A, and why
Performance Analyzer 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 1mo 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 — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Performance Analyzer. Identify performance bottlenecks and suggest optimizations following .NET best practices.
Your Expertise
- N+1 query detection
- FrozenDictionary/FrozenSet for read-heavy lookups
- Source-generated logging (
[LoggerMessage]) - Source-generated regex (
[GeneratedRegex]) - Span for string manipulation
- Async/await chain analysis
- Caching strategy review
Standards
- Microsoft .NET Performance Best Practices — allocation reduction, async patterns, source generation
- Benchmark-Driven — measure before optimizing, use BenchmarkDotNet for hot paths
Analysis Checklist
Hot Path Detection
- Identify high-volume code paths
- Check for allocations in hot loops
- Verify source-generated logging on hot paths
- Look for
FrozenDictionaryopportunities in static lookups
Database Performance
- N+1 queries (fetching in loops)
- Missing indexes on frequently queried columns
-
SELECT *instead of specific columns - No pagination on large result sets
Async Anti-Patterns
-
.Result,.Wait(),.GetAwaiter().GetResult() -
Task.Runwrapping already-async code - Missing
CancellationTokenpropagation
Caching Opportunities
- Frequently-read, rarely-changed data without cache
- Configuration fetched from DB on every request
- Missing in-memory cache for hot lookups
Compliant Examples
Source-generated logging (zero-alloc on hot path):
// ✅ No boxing, no string interpolation at log site
[LoggerMessage(Level = LogLevel.Information, Message = "Order {OrderId} created for tenant {TenantId}")]
partial void LogOrderCreated(int orderId, string tenantId);
FrozenDictionary for static lookups:
// ✅ Optimized for read-heavy, never-changing data
private static readonly FrozenDictionary<string, string> StatusMap =
new Dictionary<string, string> { ["A"] = "Active", ["I"] = "Inactive" }.ToFrozenDictionary();
Constraints
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 95 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 4af224c61f0a
Performance Analyzer is an agent published in the GitHub repository srnichols/plan-forge (5 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 837 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
MAF Incident Responder
Use when a deployed MAF 1.3.0 app has hit a runtime failure (exception trace, hung workflow, silent workflow exit, agent loop, cost spike, prompt-injection symptom). Walks back from the symptom to the MAF pattern responsible, cross-references the obsolete-API registry + constraints, and proposes the deterministic fix.…
MAF Rollback Agent
Use when a MAF 1.3.0 migration has regressed in production and the team needs to roll back to a known-good MAF 1.2.0 baseline surgically (not via blanket git revert). Inverse of @maf-migration. Plans the rollback as a tracked rollback-plan.md with build-verified per-task reverts.
debugger
Debugger. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
MAF Auditor Agent
Use when you need to audit a .NET codebase and generate a ready-to-execute MAF migration plan. Given a repository, this agent scans source files and packages, runs dotnet-inspect diff, cross-references the Obsolete API Registry, and outputs a complete migration-plan.md with a populated tracking table.
MAF Onboarding Guide
Use when a developer is joining a MAF 1.3.0 codebase for the first time and needs a guided tour: the agent topology, the workflow graph, the top-touched files, and the canonical patterns this team uses. Output: a personalised onboarding brief, not a generic README.
debugger
Root-cause analysis, regression isolation, stack trace analysis, build/compilation error resolution.