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/hmj1026/dhpk/project-briefgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hmj1026/dhpkWrote 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/hmj1026/dhpk/project-brief)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/hmj1026/dhpk/project-brief"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/hmj1026/dhpk/project-brief.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 | $0.00024 | $0.00783 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00392 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00157 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
project-brief 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 today.
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 — 132 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Contract
Use to convert a readable technical spec into an executive brief; not to edit the source spec. See the command contract. Stop when the source is missing or unreadable; completion reports the output path and unresolved decisions retained for review.
Context
- Project root: !
git rev-parse --show-toplevel
Task
You are now a brief-writer expert. Convert the technical spec into a PM/CTO-readable executive summary.
Input
$ARGUMENTS
Conversion Rules
| Tech Spec Section | PM/CTO Summary Treatment |
|---|---|
| Trust boundary diagram | ⚠️ Simplify to 3-layer arch |
| Code analysis | ❌ Remove |
| Reusable modules | ❌ Remove |
| System architecture | ✅ Keep (simplified) |
| Implementation roadmap | ✅ Keep |
| Key design decisions | ❌ Remove |
| Alternative comparison | ✅ Keep |
| Risks & mitigations | ✅ Keep |
| Timeline | ✅ Keep |
| Immediate actions | ⚠️ Simplify to decision points |
Execution Flow
Step 1: Read Technical Spec
- Read the specified tech spec file
- Identify the core value proposition
Step 2: Extract Key Information
- Project overview: one sentence on what, why, and value
- Current state vs target comparison
- Solution evaluation (keep pros/cons comparison)
- Milestone timeline
- Risk summary
- Resource requirements
Step 3: Simplify Technical Details
- Remove code snippets
- Remove internal module names
- Remove technical implementation details
- Keep business logic descriptions
Step 4: Produce Executive Summary
Output
Produce a PM/CTO-readable executive summary in the following format:
# [Project Name] Executive Summary
## Project Overview
> One sentence: what, why, and value
## Current State vs Target
| Dimension | Current | Target |
| --------- | ------- | ------ |
| | | |
## Solution Evaluation
| Solution | Pros | Cons | Recommendation |
| --------------- | ---- | ---- | -------------- |
| Option A | | | |
| Option B | | | |
| Recommended | | | ✅ Adopt |
## Architecture Overview
(Simplified system diagram, 3 layers max)
## Milestones
| Week | Deliverable | Dependencies |
| ------ | ----------- | ------------ |
| Week 1 | | |
| Week 2 | | |
## Risk Summary
| Risk | Impact Level | Mitigation |
| ---- | ------------ | ---------- |
| | | |
## Resource Requirements
- **Headcount**:
- **Timeline**:
- **External Dependencies**:
## Decision Points
> Items requiring PM/CTO decision
- [ ] Decision 1:
- [ ] Decision 2:
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.
- today First seen · 132 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A 8bacf370eb98
project-brief is a command published in the GitHub repository hmj1026/dhpk (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 783 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-05.
Other commands, from other repositories
init
在既有專案初始化 Octopus——摸專案、檢查 OpenSpec CLI 與結構(缺則引導安裝)、盤點 change 狀態、建 Arena、出交接報告。每個專案跑一次。.
spec
SDD 前半段:需求釐清(反問+挑戰)→ OpenSpec change 一次落檔(proposal+delta+tasks,Draft)→ TPM 拍板鎖定(回一個 OK 即可)。鎖定後 build 全自主執行。.
debug
用 Agent 工具啟動 debugger agent,把錯誤資訊原文(含截圖/log)完整轉給它。.
review
單獨審查——Reviewer 對指定 branch/變更出四段式驗收報告(可直接貼 PR description)。.
review
Comprehensive multi-agent code quality and architecture review with cross-validation.
config
View and configure Argus settings.