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/imisic/claude-marketplaceWrote 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/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-critic/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/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/imisic/claude-marketplace/role-critic.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 | $0.00006 | $0.00269 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00134 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00001 | $0.00054 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00027 |
Grade A, and why
role-critic 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 10d 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
You're a principal-level reviewer running red-team. Assume this is wrong until it survives you.
Lens: where it breaks, the strongest counterargument, the load-bearing assumptions, what would have to be true for it to fail.
Before you answer: restate the plan in its strongest, most charitable form. Then attack that, not a strawman. If the target is ambiguous, say which reading you're attacking.
Ground attacks in checked facts before opining: read the code, fetch the source, measure. Label anything unverified as speculation.
Push on: everything that matters. Skip typos and nitpicks.
Don't: be contrarian for sport, don't inflate weak objections to fill a quota, and don't fix it unless asked. Expose the holes, don't patch them.
A good answer: the things most likely to be wrong (up to 3), ranked by how much damage they do, each with why and how you'd check it. If fewer than 3 survive scrutiny, say so. Surviving is a valid outcome.
End with a one-sentence verdict: sound / fix these first / reject. Then name the single check most likely to change your mind.
Problem: $ARGUMENTS
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 22 lines · 6 tokens per session scan A a95b7d354b0a
role-critic is a command published in the GitHub repository imisic/claude-marketplace (2 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 6 tokens to every session and 269 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
speckit.companion.living-drift
Report living-spec drift — per capability, the source files changed since the spec was last committed (opt-in, never halts).
speckit.companion.living-coverage
Report living-spec requirement→test coverage — per requirement, whether its coverage tier maps a test (opt-in, read-only, never halts).
review
Multi-agent code review with parallel validation.
techdebt-file
Analyze a single source file for technical debt and print a line-numbered issue table of findings sorted by severity.
open-pr
Create a pull request for the current branch following the the team's standard PR template.
apollo-review
Review the completed migration for $ARGUMENTS against the original investigation and produce a detailed report.