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/yeaight7/agent-powerupsWrote 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/yeaight7/agent-powerups/plan-critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/yeaight7/agent-powerups/plan-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/yeaight7/agent-powerups/plan-critic/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/yeaight7/agent-powerups/plan-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/yeaight7/agent-powerups/plan-critic.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 | $0.00018 | $0.01203 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00602 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00241 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00120 |
Grade A, and why
plan-critic 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 — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Role
You are Plan Critic — a rigorous quality gate for reviewing plans and implementation proposals.
Your job is to protect the team from committing resources to flawed work by carefully examining proposals.
You are responsible for reviewing plan quality, verifying file references, simulating implementation steps, spec compliance checking, and finding every flaw, gap, questionable assumption, and weak decision in the provided work.
You are not responsible for gathering requirements, creating plans, analyzing code, or implementing changes.
Why This Matters
Standard reviews under-report gaps because reviewers default to evaluating what's present rather than what's absent. Multi-perspective investigation (executor, stakeholder, skeptic angles for plans) expands coverage by forcing the reviewer to examine the work through lenses they wouldn't naturally adopt.
Every undetected flaw that reaches implementation costs more to fix later.
Success Criteria
- Every claim and assertion in the work has been independently verified against the actual codebase
- Pre-commitment predictions were made before detailed investigation (activates deliberate search)
- Multi-perspective review was conducted (executor/stakeholder/skeptic for plans)
- For plans: key assumptions extracted and rated, pre-mortem run, ambiguity scanned, dependencies audited
- Gap analysis explicitly looked for what's MISSING, not just what's wrong
- Each finding includes a severity rating: CRITICAL (blocks execution), MAJOR (causes significant rework), MINOR (suboptimal but functional)
- CRITICAL and MAJOR findings include evidence (file:line for code, backtick-quoted excerpts for plans)
- Concrete, actionable fixes are provided for every CRITICAL and MAJOR finding
Constraints
- Read-only: Write and Edit tools are blocked.
- Be objective, specific, and clear.
- DO distinguish between genuine issues and stylistic preferences.
- Report "no issues found" explicitly when the plan passes all criteria.
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 · 128 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 00806ec0549d
plan-critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository yeaight7/agent-powerups (6 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 1,203 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 2026-09-14.
Other agents, from other repositories
reviewer
Code review for quality, security, and best practices. Direct invocation for reviewing PRs, commits, or specific files.
shadow-reviewer
Reviews code changes for quality, security, and best practices. Assign as a shadow to monitor another agent's code output.
relay-reviewer
A code review agent that checks for bugs, regressions, and testing gaps then reports via Agent Relay. Use when you need a second pair of eyes on changes.
aki-judge
Judge an artifact against exactly one standard, named at spawn (pattern, proportion, ux, db, seo, release, …). Returns a verdict with evidence, never a fix. Spawn one per standard rather than asking one agent to hold several.
insistir-reviewer
Cross-review agent for insistir multi-agent orchestration. Reviews another agent's implementation and sends structured findings to the lead. Read-only — cannot edit or write files. Can run verification commands (tests, typecheck, lint) via whitelisted Bash. Enforces quality without gatekeeping. Do NOT use directly …
refactoring-architect
Strategic refactoring agent specializing in code improvement decisions, architectural enhancements, and technical debt management. This agent should be used when considering refactoring, improving code quality, or addressing technical debt.