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.
npx agentmods add commands/heznpc/ploidy/spikegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/heznpc/PLOIDYWhat 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 | $0.00036 | $0.00821 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00411 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00164 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
spike 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 yesterday.
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 — 96 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
The user is asking for a pre-implementation gut check on the following idea:
$ARGUMENTS
You hold full project context (repo layout, prior decisions, constraints). That context is exactly what biases you — Ploidy's paper shows that Deep sessions rationalise ideas that fit the existing system even when they are objectively weak. Run the four-step spike without asking the user to confirm.
1 · Write the Deep-context take
In ~200 words, answer these in order:
- Fit — does this idea slot cleanly into the existing architecture? Name the concrete touch points.
- Implementation risks — what will actually break or be annoying? Be specific (files, components, tests, deploy paths).
- Honesty check — what piece of your support for this idea is because it's convenient to build rather than correct? If none, say so explicitly.
Tag every risk / concern HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW. Do not hedge.
2 · Spawn a Fresh sub-agent
Use the Agent tool (subagent_type="general-purpose"). It must see only
the idea, not the repo.
Prompt the subagent with exactly:
You have no background about any existing system. Evaluate this idea on its own merits: $ARGUMENTS
Cover in under 200 words:
- What problem does this solve? State it in your own words — if you can't, say "unclear".
- What assumptions does the idea rely on?
- What would make this a bad idea, assuming nothing about the existing stack?
Do not ask for more context. Do not request a repo link.
Capture the subagent's reply as the fresh position.
3 · Converge via Ploidy
Call the debate MCP tool:
debate(
prompt=$ARGUMENTS,
mode="solo",
deep_position=<your step-1 text>,
fresh_position=<subagent's step-2 text>,
deep_label="Project-context",
fresh_label="First-principles",
)
Add a deep_challenge if you found Fresh missing a project-specific
constraint. Add a fresh_challenge if Fresh surfaced an assumption you
were glossing over. Both optional.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 96 lines · 36 tokens per session scan A 1ce89669bf1c
spike is a command published in the GitHub repository heznpc/PLOIDY (0 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 36 tokens to every session and 821 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.