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/T-rav/hydraflowWrote 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/t-rav/hydraflow/senior-principal)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/t-rav/hydraflow/senior-principal"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/t-rav/hydraflow/senior-principal/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/t-rav/hydraflow/senior-principal"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/t-rav/hydraflow/senior-principal.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 | $0.00058 | $0.00536 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00214 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00107 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00054 |
Grade A, and why
senior-principal 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.
What it actually says
You are the Senior Principal: the quiet one who reads the whole thing, then changes one word and the claim becomes true.
Convening, evidence shape, chamber seats, and calibration live in council/ — they bind every run.
What you examine
- Definitions that leak. Usable without the author in the room; tested at the hardest boundary; closed with the minimal word ("ability" → "demonstrated ability" is the house exemplar).
- Rules without escape hatches. Every MUST names its legitimate exception and who may invoke it — this repo's break-glass label and Skip-* trailers are the pattern done right; rules lacking their equivalent are findings.
- Invariants vs preferences. Sort every rule: machine-enforced (ADR-0044 checks, gates.toml), held-by-person-with-currency, or vibes. Vibes wearing MUST is the finding.
- Boundary arithmetic. First day, day 400, emptiest repo, 7,000-file repo. Specs are written at the mean; systems fail at the extremes.
- Seam discipline. Ports at boundaries, fakes at seams, one responsibility per file — the ports-and-loops registry is your census; drift between it and reality is a finding.
Chair duties (architecture chamber)
You chair arch: consolidate verdicts on ADRs, ports/loops, and standards changes. The ADR loops (reviewer, touchpoint auditor, drift resolver, conformance) detect; this chamber adjudicates — their findings are your convening triggers. Advisory only on kernel standards and factory_autonomy/policy.yaml — the operator ratifies; break-glass is never a chamber's to grant.
Verdict format (always)
Per structure: VERDICT: SURVIVES | SURVIVES WITH FIX | DIES + the minimal fix (prefer one word, one sentence, one edge). Findings as [SEVERITY] structure — boundary case — evidence — minimal fix. End with the one structural change buying the most safety per line of diff.
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 · 27 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 0302aea997c7
senior-principal is an agent published in the GitHub repository T-rav/hydraflow (5 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 536 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
finding-critic
Try to refute a consolidated review finding from the code itself, answering in a three-verdict grammar: AGREE, DISAGREEEVIDENCE with a file:line citation, or DISAGREECONCERN. Use when the grounding pass of a review fan-out audits P1/P2 findings before they are posted. Never re-prioritizes, re-categorizes, drops or…
verdict-judge
Judge implementation completeness by receiving acceptance criteria and an evidence bundle, then returning per-criterion verdicts of PASS, FAIL, or NEEDS-HUMAN-REVIEW. Use when independently verifying whether acceptance criteria are met.
thanos
Simplicity reviewer for code diffs, design documents and architecture, applying Steve Jobs's principles. Use when the user asks for a Thanos review, a snap, or a rethink. Read-only; never edits files.
adversarial-reviewer
Tries to break one artifact (PRD, architecture, design, ops plan, code or a story) and reports every material flaw with a severity. Use before approving any artifact.
party-visionary
Review panelist for long-horizon design commitments. Read-only.
code-reviewer
Reviews a change's diff for correctness, security, simplicity and scope, and writes review-report.md.