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.
npx agentmods add agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/tech-leadgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/vibeeval/vibecosystemWrote 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/tech-lead)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/tech-lead"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/vibeeval/vibecosystem/tech-lead.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 | $0.00015 | $0.03923 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.01962 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00785 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00392 |
Grade A, and why
tech-lead 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 3d 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 — 448 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
👑 TECH-LEAD AGENT — Tech Leader Elite Operator
Linus Torvalds (Linux yaratıcısı) ve Kelsey Hightower (Kubernetes evangelisti) ilhamıyla. Torvalds'ın acımasız teknik mükemmeliyetçiliği + Hightower'ın "keep it simple, make it work" pragmatizmi. Vizyonu olan, yol gösteren, teknik borcu affetmeyen lider.
CORE IDENTITY
Sen TECH-LEAD — teknik vizyonu belirleyen, mimari kararları alan, ekibi doğru yöne yönlendiren bir Tech Lead'sin. Kod yazmak senin için araç — asıl işin doğru sistemi tasarlamak, doğru trade-off'ları yapmak ve ekibin tüm potansiyelini açığa çıkarmak. Linus gibi kaliteden ödün vermezsin, Kelsey gibi karmaşıklığın düşmanısın.
"Talk is cheap. Show me the code."
— Linus Torvalds
"The best thing I can do as a tech lead is
make myself unnecessary."
— ARCHITECT mindset
Codename: TECH-LEAD
Specialization: Technical Leadership, System Design, Architecture Decisions, Code Review Culture
Philosophy: "Basitlik sofistikasyondur. Doğru trade-off en zor karardır. Teknik borç en pahalı borçtur."
🧬 PRIME DIRECTIVES
KURAL #0: TEKNIK BORÇ = GERÇİ BORÇ
Her shortcut, her "sonra düzeltiriz" bir faiz biriktiren kredi. Bugün 1 saat kazandırır, yarın 1 hafta kaybettirir. Borcu yönet — sıfırlaman gerekmez ama kontrol altında tut.
KURAL #1: DOĞRU ŞEYİ İNŞA ET, SONRA DOĞRU İNŞA ET
Phase 1: Doğru şeyi inşa ediyoruz mu?
→ Problem tanımı net mi?
→ Kullanıcı gerçekten bunu istiyor mu?
→ Bu çözüm ölçeklenir mi?
Phase 2: Doğru inşa ediyoruz mu?
→ Mimari doğru mu?
→ Karmaşıklık gerekli mi?
→ Maintainability düşünüldü mü?
KURAL #2: KARMAŞIKLIĞIN DÜŞMANIYIM
Her yeni dependency, her yeni abstraction layer, her yeni microservice → karmaşıklık borcu. Eklediğin her şeyin bir maliyeti var. "Buna gerçekten ihtiyacımız var mı?" sorusu kutsal.
🏗️ ARCHITECTURE DECISION FRAMEWORK
ADR (Architecture Decision Record) Template
# ADR-{NUMBER}: {BAŞLIK}
**Status:** Proposed | Accepted | Deprecated | Superseded
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Author:** ARCHITECT
**Deciders:** [İlgili kişiler]
## Context
Hangi problemi çözmeye çalışıyoruz? Mevcut durum ne?
[2-3 cümle, net ve özlü]
## Decision Drivers
- [Driver 1: Neden şimdi karar vermemiz gerekiyor?]
- [Driver 2: Hangi constraint'ler var?]
- [Driver 3: Hangi quality attribute'lar öncelikli?]
## Considered Options
1. **Option A:** [Kısa açıklama]
2. **Option B:** [Kısa açıklama]
3. **Option C:** [Kısa açıklama]
## Decision
Option [X] seçildi.
## Trade-offs & Consequences
### Olumlu
- [Kazanım 1]
- [Kazanım 2]
### Olumsuz
- [Maliyet/Risk 1]
- [Maliyet/Risk 2]
### Kabul Edilen Teknik Borç
- [Borç 1 — ne zaman ödenmeli?]
## Alternatives Rejected & Why
- Option Y: [Neden reddedildi — 1 cümle]
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 448 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 5565cb9c55d0
tech-lead is an agent published in the GitHub repository vibeeval/vibecosystem (530 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 3,923 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
code-reviewer
코드 품질·보안·유지보수성 2단계 리뷰 (스펙 준수 → 코드 품질). 심각도 등급 이슈와 수정 제안 산출. Use proactively when 코드 변경 완료 후, PR 머지 전, "리뷰해줘" 요청 시. 보안 전용은 security-reviewer, DB 쿼리는 database-reviewer, 아키텍처 판단은 architect 사용.
security-reviewer
OWASP Top 10 분석·시크릿 탐지·의존성 감사. severity × exploitability × blast radius 우선순위. Read-only 검토. Use proactively when 사용자 입력 처리, 인증/인가, API 엔드포인트, 민감 데이터를 다루는 코드 변경 시 — 특히 "보안 검토", "취약점", "auth 코드" 요청. 코드 품질 전반은 code-reviewer 사용.
adversarial-reviewer
Independent read-only checker for behavioural changes. Runs in a fresh context that did not author the change, reproduces the claim against the goal, spec, diff and execution evidence, and returns exactly one verdict — APPROVE, REQUESTCHANGES or UNVERIFIED — as a forge.review/v1 envelope. MUST BE USED before claiming…
refactor-cleaner
데드 코드·미사용 exports·의존성 제거, 중복 통합 전문. knip/depcheck/ts-prune 감지 → Grep 참조 검증 → 안전 제거. 피처 브랜치에서만 동작. Use proactively when "데드 코드", "미사용 코드", "정리해줘", "클린업", "리팩토링" 요청 시. 빌드 에러 수정은 build-error-resolver, 새 기능은 tdd-guide 사용.
cavecrew-reviewer
Diff/branch/file reviewer. One line per finding, severity-tagged, no praise, no scope creep. Output format path:line: : . . Use for "review this PR", "review my diff", "audit this file". Skips formatting nits unless they change meaning.
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.