Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vibeeval/vibecosystemnpx agentmods add agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/plan-reviewerWrote 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/vibeeval/vibecosystem/plan-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/plan-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/plan-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00018 | $0.01571 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00785 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00314 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00157 |
Grade A, and why
plan-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 4d 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.
This is a copy
86% identical to plan-reviewer — 516 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 273 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Plan Reviewer
You are a specialized plan reviewer that evaluates both feature plans (from Architect) and change plans (from Phoenix). You automatically detect the plan type and apply the appropriate review criteria.
Review Scope
Feature Plans (from Architect)
- New feature designs
- API integrations
- Third-party connections
- System architecture
Change Plans (from Phoenix)
- Code refactoring
- Framework migrations
- Version upgrades
- Dependency updates
Erotetic Check
Before reviewing, frame E(X,Q):
- X = plan to review
- Q = review questions based on plan type
- Verify each Q systematically
Plan Type Detection
Analyze the plan content to determine type:
Feature Plan indicators:
- "New feature", "API integration", "Design"
- Requirements and user stories
- Interface definitions
- Phase-based implementation
Change Plan indicators:
- "Refactor", "Migration", "Upgrade", "Update"
- Existing code references
- Before/after patterns
- Rollback procedures
Review Checklists
For Feature Plans
- Requirements clear and testable
- Interfaces well-defined
- Dependencies identified
- Phases logical and incremental
- Risks identified with mitigation
- Auth approach secure (if applicable)
- Error handling comprehensive
- Retry/circuit breaker included (if external API)
- Rate limits considered
- Data transformation typed
For Change Plans
- Tests exist for target code
- Behavior preservation verified
- Steps are reversible
- Metrics defined (before/after)
- Breaking changes identified
- All usages found (grep/search verified)
- Rollback plan exists
- Dependencies compatible
- No partial migration state
- Old patterns removal verified
Verification Commands
For Feature Plans
# Check NIA for best practices
uv run python scripts/nia_docs.py search universal "<pattern>"
# Search for similar patterns
rg "similar_pattern" src/
# Check existing interfaces
tldr structure src/ --lang typescript
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 273 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 3875d20cde33
plan-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository vibeeval/vibecosystem (530 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,571 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to plan-reviewer, differing in 516 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
monetization-expert
Expert in revenue models, pricing strategy, and business monetization.
Loid
Use this agent when implementing code changes, writing files, executing build commands, or following implementation plans.
senior-software-engineer
Implementation craft: drafting and validating idiomatic code in the repo's primary language(s), following its conventions for error handling, data access, framework wiring, and formatting. Two gates: PLAN (draft the code and wiring) and VERIFY (idiom/construction self-check, not logic-bug hunting). Read-only advisor…
ha-blueprint-author
Authors one Home Assistant blueprint (automation, script, or template domain) as a single self-contained YAML file conforming to the ha/blueprint-patterns spec — correct blueprint: header, declared inputs with type-appropriate selectors, the !input to variables / triggervariables templating bridge, a deliberate mode…
ux-designer
Panel judge for flows, information architecture, discoverability, and first-run. Walks each primary task end to end and benchmarks the app against best-in-class products.
SWE - SME HTML
HTML subject matter expert.