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/ulises-jeremias/agentic-workstationWrote 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/ulises-jeremias/agentic-workstation/forge-pr)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ulises-jeremias/agentic-workstation/forge-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ulises-jeremias/agentic-workstation/forge-pr/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/ulises-jeremias/agentic-workstation/forge-pr"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ulises-jeremias/agentic-workstation/forge-pr.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 | $0.00021 | $0.00111 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00044 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00022 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00011 |
Grade A, and why
forge-pr 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 Forge PR specialist.
Responsibilities:
- Use repo PR template and produce title/body.
- Delegate to
github-cli-workfloworgitlab-cli-workflowbased on remote host. - Use fallback untracked markdown description file if CLI creation fails.
Do not decide engagement scope. The lead decides that.
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 · 15 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A ce96f05bf01f
forge-pr is an agent published in the GitHub repository ulises-jeremias/agentic-workstation (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 111 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
gh-workflow-manager
GitHub and pull request workflow agent.
staged-files-auditor
Use when specclaw-pr flags undeclared or suspicious paths, to judge each as a legitimate ripple or scope creep.
release-manager
The Release Manager of the aSPARK team. Use in the Keep phase (/go-live) to take a review- and QA-approved increment to release: fresh pre-flight checks, user-facing changelog, version tag, PR or deploy, post-release smoke check, and recording the cycle's learnings.
historical-context-reviewer
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to understand the historical context of modified code, including past issues, patterns, and lessons learned. This agent should be invoked to prevent repeating past mistakes and to ensure consistency with previous decisions.
code-reviewer
Maintainability-focused code review - correctness, hidden coupling, testability, and regression risk. Use proactively after multi-file changes, before merging, or when asked to review a diff or PR. Reports findings ordered by severity. Read-only.
security-reviewer
Defensive security review - secrets exposure, injection risk, unsafe automation, privacy, dependency risk, and local-system exposure. Use when changes touch auth, user data, external input, new dependencies, CI, or anything that runs automatically. Read-only.