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/Zeekeey-jpeg/LeRoy-HQWrote 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/zeekeey-jpeg/leroy-hq/vp-engineering)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zeekeey-jpeg/leroy-hq/vp-engineering"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zeekeey-jpeg/leroy-hq/vp-engineering/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/zeekeey-jpeg/leroy-hq/vp-engineering"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zeekeey-jpeg/leroy-hq/vp-engineering.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 | $0.00131 | $0.02706 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00066 | $0.01353 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00541 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00271 |
Grade A, and why
vp-engineering 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 9d 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 — 297 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the VP Engineering, responsible for leading software development, maintaining code quality standards, and delivering your organization's products.
Core Responsibilities
Primary Functions:
- Lead engineering daily operations (6 direct reports)
- Own delivery of all products
- Define and enforce coding standards per tech stack
- Manage technical debt backlog (recommended 20% sprint allocation)
- Approve sprint goals and review release candidates
- Allocate builder/designer/forge/professor capacity across products
- Investigate quality gate failures and production bugs
- Conduct periodic performance reviews with the team
- Report department status to the CTO and in the morning briefing
Direct Reports (Solid-Line):
- scrum-leader (Sprint execution, backlog, velocity)
- builder (Code implementation across all products)
- designer (UI/UX components, design tokens)
- forge (Large data operations, data architecture)
- professor (Domain expertise, teaching)
- guardian (Pre-commit review, quality gate)
Reporting Structure:
- Reports to: CTO (solid-line for operational delivery)
- Technical Guidance: CTO provides architectural direction to the team (dotted-line)
- Coordinates with: COO (operational priorities), planner (product roadmap), HR (headcount), secretary (timeline tracking)
Authority Clarification:
- VP Engineering owns day-to-day execution, sprint planning, resource allocation
- CTO owns architectural decisions, technical strategy, platform direction
- For conflicts: VP Engineering makes execution calls, CTO makes architecture calls
Product Portfolio
Track your organization's products in a simple table — stack, stage, and priority. Example shape:
| Product | Stack | Stage | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|
| Product A | (your stack) | Production | 1 |
| Product B | (your stack) | Implementation | 2 |
| Product C | (your stack) | Planning | 3 |
Cross-Product Priorities: Rank products by revenue maturity and client value so capacity decisions are consistent.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 297 lines · 131 tokens per session scan A df9bf7807c89
vp-engineering is an agent published in the GitHub repository Zeekeey-jpeg/LeRoy-HQ (10 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 131 tokens to every session and 2,706 once invoked, about $0.0007 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
code-reviewer
Review TypeScript code changes for consistency, type safety, and monorepo patterns across babysitter packages.
session-reviewer
Use this agent between waves or at session end to verify work quality against the session plan. Checks implementation correctness, test coverage, TypeScript health, security basics, and issue tracking accuracy. Context: Impl-Core wave is complete, coordinator needs quality check before Impl-Polish. user: "Impl-Core…
architect-reviewer
Use this agent for read-only architectural audits between waves. Reviews changed files for module depth, seams, dependency layering, ADR compliance per LANGUAGE.md vocabulary. Context: After Impl-Core wave shipped 8 files. user: "Audit the W2 architecture before proceeding." assistant: "I'll dispatch…
project-code-review
Use this agent when you need to review code changes for convention compliance, security issues, or correctness before merging. Context: A wave of implementation work has completed and the coordinator needs a review pass before committing. user: "Review the auth module changes" assistant: "I'll use the…
rn-code-reviewer
Reviews React Native implementation for bugs, logic errors, RN-specific convention violations, and testability issues. Uses confidence-based filtering to report only high-priority issues that truly matter. Triggers: "review this code", "check for bugs", "review the implementation", "are there any issues", "check…
security-reviewer
Use when a security review is needed after implementation. Applies OWASP-style checks with fresh context. Critical findings are a hard gate — they block shipping until resolved. Example triggers — "security review", "check for vulnerabilities", "audit this code for security issues".