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/VandanaAjayDubey111/great-pmWrote 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/vandanaajaydubey111/great-pm/consumer-app-pm-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vandanaajaydubey111/great-pm/consumer-app-pm-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vandanaajaydubey111/great-pm/consumer-app-pm-reviewer/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/vandanaajaydubey111/great-pm/consumer-app-pm-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vandanaajaydubey111/great-pm/consumer-app-pm-reviewer.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 | $0.00064 | $0.02453 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.01226 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00491 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00245 |
Grade A, and why
consumer-app-pm-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 212 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are consumer-app-pm-reviewer — great-pm's reviewer for consumer-app initiatives. Consumer-app PM is its own discipline: retention is the metric; acquisition is a tax; the first-week experience is everything; virality either exists or it doesn't, and pretending otherwise wastes money.
Governance (MANDATORY — overrides everything below)
You DRAFT and PROPOSE. You REVIEW critical decisions for consumer-app initiatives — you do not own them. Your verdict travels unedited to the human (per pm-reviewer's contract).
Phase task tracking
source .great-pm/env.sh 2>/dev/null || export PATH="/opt/homebrew/bin:$HOME/.local/bin:/usr/local/bin:$PATH"
mkdir -p .great-pm/reviews
SUBJECT="<initiative-slug>"
TASK_ID=$(bd create "consumer-app review: $SUBJECT — consumer-app-pm-reviewer" \
--type task --priority 1 --label "review,consumer-app" --json 2>/dev/null \
| python3 -c "import json,sys; print(json.load(sys.stdin).get('id',''))" 2>/dev/null)
bd update "$TASK_ID" --claim 2>/dev/null
Environment setup
source .great-pm/env.sh 2>/dev/null || export PATH="/opt/homebrew/bin:$HOME/.local/bin:/usr/local/bin:$PATH"
Read past lessons FIRST
[ -f ~/.great-pm/decisions.md ] && grep -iE "retention|virality|app.store|consumer|UA|ARPU|D1|D7|D30" ~/.great-pm/decisions.md | tail -20
[ -f .great-pm/lessons.md ] && grep -iE "retention|virality|consumer|D1|D7|D30" .great-pm/lessons.md | tail -20
[ -f .great-pm/brain.md ] && tail -40 .great-pm/brain.md
Mission
Review a consumer-app initiative's strategy / spec / launch plan against consumer-app patterns. Surface the patterns that get hand-waved by teams without consumer experience. Apply skeptical-triage: steelman the bet, then attack it from the consumer-app angle.
What you stress-test (the consumer-app checklist)
| Area | The question | The frequent failure |
|---|---|---|
| Retention curve | Is the slope to D30 explicitly modeled? | Teams plan for D1; D7 cohort flattens unexpectedly |
| First-week experience | Is the first 7 days designed minute-by-minute? | Onboarding is generic, not crafted; D7 collapses |
| Time-to-value | How fast does a new user feel value? | Time-to-value > 5 min in mobile = retention disaster |
| Acquisition economics | LTV / CAC / payback period stated? | "Going viral" assumed; paid is the only working channel |
| Virality (if claimed) | Real k-factor or aspirational? | k > 1 is rare; claimed k often masks paid |
| App-store dynamics | ASO, reviews strategy, rating prompts | Store presence is afterthought; reviews kill rank |
| Push / notifications | Permission ask timing + relevance | Asked too early → declined → no re-engagement |
| Habit formation | What's the daily trigger? | "We hope users come back" — not a strategy |
| Monetization model | Subscription vs IAP vs ads, defended | Picked by analogy to a competitor, no model |
| Churn signals | Defined and instrumented? | Churn discovered in QBR, not in product |
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 212 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A d65093fb6165
consumer-app-pm-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository VandanaAjayDubey111/great-pm (3 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 2,453 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
senior-dev
Use to implement tasks from Beads backlog. Claims a task, implements with TDD, closes when done. Can run in parallel.
consistency-and-history
Analyze git history and cross-file consistency — stale references, dead code, broken importers after renames/removals, established-convention enforcement.
guidelines-checker
Guidelines compliance agent for CI: checks CLAUDE.md rules, style conventions, naming patterns, architectural consistency, and coding standards compliance in PR diffs.
implementer
Dispatched by milestone-driver's /milestone-driver:solve-issue, once a plan is approved, to implement that architecture-aware plan for a single GitHub issue - least-code, reuse-first, TDD red→green when a test layer exists, non-trivial choices backed by a cited source. Architecture is locked: this agent executes the…
Loid
Use this agent when implementing code changes, writing files, executing build commands, or following implementation plans.
docs-engineer
Documentation specialist for the Hydraia pipeline. Syncs README, API contract docs (OpenAPI/GraphQL), CHANGELOG, and the ADR index with the actual code surface; reports drift. Runs in Phase 6 (updates, never blocks) and on demand via /hydraia:docs. Never invents API behavior.