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/avelikiy/great_ctoWrote 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/commands/avelikiy/great_cto/poc)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/avelikiy/great_cto/poc"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/avelikiy/great_cto/poc.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 | $0.00031 | $0.02572 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01286 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00514 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00257 |
Grade A, and why
poc 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 283 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the great_cto POC-mode runner. A POC (Proof of Concept) is a time-boxed experiment that answers one specific question with throwaway code. Not a mini-project, not a "soft launch" — an explicit experiment with hypothesis, deadline, and forced decision at expiry.
Guard: great_cto not initialised
[ -f .great_cto/PROJECT.md ] || { echo "No PROJECT.md found. Run /start first, then /poc."; exit 0; }
Sub-command dispatch
Parse $1 as the sub-command. Supported forms:
/poc <hypothesis>→ new POC (anything that's not a reserved keyword)/poc decide→ ritual decision at expiry/poc extend <days>→ extend timebox once (max 1 extension)/poc status→ show current POC state
Action: new POC
Triggered when $1 is not decide, extend, or status. The entire input
is the hypothesis string.
Step 1 — Check for active POC
ACTIVE=$(grep "^mode:\s*poc" .great_cto/PROJECT.md 2>/dev/null)
if [ -n "$ACTIVE" ]; then
SLUG=$(grep "^poc_slug:" .great_cto/PROJECT.md | awk '{print $2}')
EXPIRES=$(grep "^poc_expires:" .great_cto/PROJECT.md | awk '{print $2}')
echo "Active POC: $SLUG (expires $EXPIRES)"
echo "Finish it with /poc decide before starting a new one."
exit 0
fi
If an active POC exists, refuse. One POC at a time — enforces focus and prevents accumulating half-finished experiments.
Step 2 — Gather POC frame interactively
If the hypothesis is vague ("explore X", "see what we can do with Y", "play with Z" —
shorter than 8 words, no falsifiable claim): invoke skills/great_cto/references/discovery.md
first. Run Block 1 (audience + pain) and Q8 (scope cut), then come back here to refine the
hypothesis into a falsifiable claim. POCs without a falsifiable claim turn into wandering
research projects.
Ask the CTO four short questions (don't skip any — these are the guardrails):
- Hypothesis — already captured as
$@. Rephrase it as a falsifiable yes/no claim. Example: "OAuth2 flow works with our existing session store" not "we should try OAuth2". - Success criteria — observable, binary, verifiable by a human in <5 min. Example: "user can log in + session persists across 3 restarts".
- Timebox — 1 / 3 / 7 / 14 days. Reject anything > 14 days — if it
needs more, it's not a POC, it's a feature. Start with
/startor create an ARCH instead. - Out of scope — 3 things you're deliberately not building. This is the most important field. Without it, POC scope drifts into production work.
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 · 283 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 3b943d50513d
poc is a command published in the GitHub repository avelikiy/great_cto (89 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 2,572 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 commands, from other repositories
auto-task
Create an agent team for autonomous workflow: plan (Architect teammate + PM teammate) → develop (Developer teammate + Code-tester teammate + QA-tester teammate + Reviewer teammate) → report (no approval gate).
status
The state of play, computed fresh: branch, dirty files, the active sprint, open work, index freshness.
fec-review
Conduct a standardized review of the specified file or recently changed front-end code, output a graded review report and save it as a Markdown file.
develop
Implement skill development issues with TDD-governed workflow.
fec-doc-sync
Sync README, docs, environment variables, scripts, API/routing/component descriptions and deployment instructions from code and project sources of truth.
rust-critique
Deep code critique — read the target Rust code and apply the full review process. Evaluates soundness, ownership, error handling, type design, async correctness, performance, and architecture. Think like a senior Rust engineer giving honest feedback.