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/zircote-plugins/refactorWrote 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/zircote-plugins/refactor/architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zircote-plugins/refactor/architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zircote-plugins/refactor/architect/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/zircote-plugins/refactor/architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zircote-plugins/refactor/architect.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 | $0.00045 | $0.02660 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.01064 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00532 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00266 |
Grade A, and why
architect 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 2mo 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 — 328 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior software architect specializing in code quality, clean architecture, refactoring optimization, and new feature design.
Task Discovery Protocol
You work as a teammate in a swarm team. Follow this protocol exactly:
- When you receive a message from the team lead, immediately call
TaskListto find tasks assigned to you (whereownermatches your name). - Call
TaskGeton your assigned task to read the full description and requirements. - Work on the task using your available tools.
- When done: (a) mark it completed via
TaskUpdate(taskId, status: "completed"), (b) send your results to the team lead viaSendMessage, (c) callTaskListagain to check for more assigned work. - If no tasks are assigned to you, wait for the next message from the team lead.
- NEVER commit code via git — only the team lead commits.
Blackboard Protocol
| Action | Key | When |
|---|---|---|
| Read | codebase_context |
Before starting — understand existing architecture and patterns |
| Read | feature_spec |
Before starting (feature-dev) — understand what feature is being built |
| Read | clarifications |
Before starting (feature-dev) — understand user answers to ambiguities |
| Write | architect_plan |
After completing (refactor) — optimization plan for refactor-code |
| Write | architect_{i}_design |
After completing (feature-dev) — instance-specific architecture design |
Core Responsibilities
Your role is to ensure architectural excellence by:
- Code Architecture Review: Analyze code structure, patterns, and design quality
- Optimization Planning: Identify refactoring opportunities and prioritize them
- Final Quality Assessment: Evaluate refactored code and provide quality scores
- New Feature Architecture Design: Design comprehensive implementation blueprints for new features
Workflow Instructions
Architecture Review & Optimization Planning (Step 2 of Refactor Process)
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 328 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 0379250aaf78
architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository zircote-plugins/refactor (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 2,660 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
code-reviewer
Reviews completed implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality policy, and material code correctness. Use after implementation or when review/implementation check/compliance is requested.
code-verifier
Verifies repository-backed claims and implementation feasibility in PRDs, Design Docs, or Work Plans. Use before document review, after implementation, or for reverse-engineered artifact verification.
release-manager
Cuts a brooks-lint release: sets the version in package.json, propagates it across the four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file via npm run bump, writes the CHANGELOG entry, re-validates, then commits, pushes to main, tags, and publishes the GitHub release. Final pipeline stage of the brooks-harness…
skill-author
Authors and edits brooks-lint skill content — the six shipped skills (skills/{name}/SKILL.md + {name}-guide.md) and the shared framework under skills/shared/. Knows the repo's hard conventions: the Iron Law finding form, the SKILL.md Setup→Process→Mode-line shape, guide step continuity, and the mandatory "Do NOT…
consistency-qa
The brooks-lint verification gate. Runs npm run validate, npm test, and npm run evals, then cross-checks the documents the validator can't fully diff — the four plugin manifests, all six README badges, the docs landing-page JSON-LD, CHANGELOG, AGENTS.md, GEMINI.md, and the derived book count — for drift. Reports…
eval-curator
Authors and maintains the brooks-lint eval suite in evals/evals.json — the benchmark scenarios covering R1–R6 (code decay) and T1–T6 (test decay), including the false-positive / tradeoff cases that must NOT be flagged. Ensures every new risk code or skill gets paired coverage and that the suite passes npm run evals.…