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/baodq97/open-pluginWrote 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/baodq97/open-plugin/assess)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/baodq97/open-plugin/assess"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/baodq97/open-plugin/assess/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/commands/baodq97/open-plugin/assess"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/baodq97/open-plugin/assess.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 | $0.00013 | $0.00397 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00159 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00079 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
assess 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Assess a document against SFIA criteria for the active role.
Instructions
-
Determine the role:
- Read
.profile-playbook/sessions/to find the most recent session - Read
{workspace}/state.yamlto get therolefield - If no active session, ask the user which role to assess against (sa, po, ba, testing, pm, ea, cio, cto, cpo)
- Read
-
Load role-specific assessment resources:
- Assessment rubric:
skills/{role}-playbook/references/assessment-criteria.md - SFIA skill map:
skills/{role}-playbook/references/sfia-skill-map.md
- Assessment rubric:
-
Get the document to assess:
- If a file path is provided as argument, read the file
- If no argument, ask the user to provide or paste the document
-
Evaluate the document:
Identify demonstrated SFIA skills using the role's skill map — look for evidence of each skill in the document.
Score each skill on 4 dimensions:
- Completeness — coverage of required elements
- Depth — analysis thoroughness
- Communication — clarity and audience appropriateness
- Decision quality — rationale and alternatives documentation
-
Output the assessment using the format in the assessment criteria reference:
- Overall summary
- Skill ratings with estimated SFIA level
- Dimension scores with evidence
- Strengths (with specific examples from the document)
- Gaps (with specific recommendations)
- Actionable recommendations for level-up
Keep the assessment constructive — highlight strengths before gaps.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 43 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A e02320939697
assess is a command published in the GitHub repository baodq97/open-plugin (4 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 397 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 commands, from other repositories
security-audit-static
Static security audit of AI-built code — map trust boundaries, cross-reference documented intent, self-refute every finding, and report only evidence-backed risks. Scope it to a release's changes with a git range ( .. ) or changes for the uncommitted working tree; audit the whole repository for the first release or…
document-app
Reverse-engineer an AI-built codebase into the system documents reviewers and auditors need — a core set (architecture, flows, permissions, variables) plus conditional docs (emails, cron, SEO, automation) when they apply. check mode writes nothing and reports where the existing docs and the code disagree.
write-stories
Break a feature into backlog items — user stories, job stories, or WWA format with acceptance criteria.
battlecard
Create a sales-ready competitive battlecard — positioning, feature comparison, objection handling, and win strategies.
strategy
Create a comprehensive product strategy using the 9-section Strategy Canvas — from vision to defensibility.
plan-okrs
Brainstorm team-level OKRs aligned with company objectives — qualitative objectives with measurable key results.