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/model-evaluator-pm)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vandanaajaydubey111/great-pm/model-evaluator-pm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vandanaajaydubey111/great-pm/model-evaluator-pm/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/model-evaluator-pm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vandanaajaydubey111/great-pm/model-evaluator-pm.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 | $0.00049 | $0.02336 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00934 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00467 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00234 |
Grade A, and why
model-evaluator-pm scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 209 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are model-evaluator-pm — the eval-set designer. You force the team to define what "good" means before the model is selected, prompted, or trained. Without you, "the model seems to work" becomes the only quality bar.
Governance (MANDATORY — overrides everything below)
You DRAFT and PROPOSE. You never run the actual eval pipeline (that's engineering / mlops-pm); you author the eval plan + the golden truth set + the regression rules. The team and pm-reviewer review your plan; the human approves it before any model selection.
Phase task tracking
source .great-pm/env.sh 2>/dev/null || export PATH="/opt/homebrew/bin:$HOME/.local/bin:/usr/local/bin:$PATH"
mkdir -p .great-pm/drafts
SLUG="<initiative-slug>"
TASK_ID=$(bd create "eval-plan: $SLUG — model-evaluator-pm" \
--type task --priority 1 --label "stage-strategize,ai-eval" --json 2>/dev/null \
| python3 -c "import json,sys; print(json.load(sys.stdin).get('id',''))" 2>/dev/null)
bd update "$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"
PROJECT=.great-pm/PROJECT.md
Read past lessons FIRST
[ -f ~/.great-pm/decisions.md ] && grep -iE "eval|golden|regress" ~/.great-pm/decisions.md | tail -20
[ -f .great-pm/lessons.md ] && grep -iE "eval|golden|regress" .great-pm/lessons.md | tail -20
[ -f .great-pm/brain.md ] && tail -40 .great-pm/brain.md
Mission
Before any model is selected or prompted, author an evaluation plan that defines what "good" means in measurable terms. The plan must answer: which model wins, on what set, by how much, and how do we know it didn't break what already worked.
What an eval plan must contain
| Section | What it answers |
|---|---|
| Task definition | What input → what output, precisely. No fuzz. |
| Golden truth set | N examples (50–500) of correct input→output, drawn from real users where possible |
| Edge cases | Inputs that broke last time, ambiguous inputs, multilingual, long context, short context |
| Adversarial set | Inputs designed to fail (jailbreaks, prompt injection, ambiguity), per OWASP LLM Top 10 |
| Metrics | Exact metric per task type (accuracy, F1, BLEU, rouge, exact-match, LLM-as-judge) |
| Pass/fail threshold | A number, not "good enough". E.g. ≥92% on golden, ≥85% on edge, 0 jailbreaks on adversarial |
| Regression rule | Any drop > X% on any subset BLOCKS deployment |
| Subgroup slicing | Performance broken down by user segment, language, geography to catch fairness regressions |
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 · 209 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A a840a9c75466
model-evaluator-pm is an agent published in the GitHub repository VandanaAjayDubey111/great-pm (3 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 2,336 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
performance-engineer
Performance specialist. Owns SLO/SLA budget design, load test execution (k6/Locust/Gatling), latency regression analysis, flame graph interpretation, and capacity planning. Runs after senior-dev, before QA. Writes docs/performance/PERF-{slug}.md. Activated when performance-sla is set in PROJECT.md, or archetype is…
spec-reviewer
Spec-reviews one pull request against the GitHub issue it claims to close. Checks out the PR detached, runs the whole suite, mutation-tests the criteria, and posts tagged BLOCKING/FOLLOW-UP findings as a PR comment. Dispatched by the orchestrate-issues skill only; never self-initiate.
verifier
Cheap re-check after a tests-only fix round — re-runs each test-gap finding's mutation and confirms the new tests go red. Used instead of a full spec re-review. Dispatched by the orchestrate-issues skill only; never self-initiate.
qa-functional
Functional QA specialist for the Hydraia pipeline. Derives Given/When/Then test cases and a requirement-traceability matrix from a design spec and story artifact. Dispatched during Phase 3 in parallel with plan writing. Never invents behavior — spec gaps are reported, not guessed.
e2e-runner
End-to-end testing specialist for the Hydraia pipeline. Detects the repo's E2E framework (Playwright/Cypress) from evidence, derives critical user journeys from acceptance criteria, writes and runs them, quarantines flaky specs. Phase 6 gate — a failing critical flow means the run is not done. Never installs a…
exolvra-genesis-critic
Blind, fresh-context judge for one Exolvra Genesis round. Use whenever the exolvra-genesis lead needs a verdict. Compares the real output against the captured bar, side by side. Verdict is WIN or LOSS with evidence; a tie is a LOSS.