Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add kellvembarbosa/team-orchestrator/plugin install teamWrote 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/kellvembarbosa/team-orchestrator/technical-debt-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/kellvembarbosa/team-orchestrator/technical-debt-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kellvembarbosa/team-orchestrator/technical-debt-reviewer/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/kellvembarbosa/team-orchestrator/technical-debt-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/kellvembarbosa/team-orchestrator/technical-debt-reviewer.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 | $0.00009 | $0.00132 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00066 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00026 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00013 |
Grade A, and why
technical-debt-reviewer 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.
This is a copy
83% identical to accessibility-analyst — 6 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Spawn an agent team named "technical-debt-reviewer" using the stored team definition.
- Read the team configuration from
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/teams/technical-debt-reviewer.md. Frontmatter may includemodelandsizehints; body holds the team's instructions. - Create an agent team that follows those instructions. Honor
modelandsizehints if present. - Incorporate this additional user context into the spawn prompt (may be empty): $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 · 12 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A e827e60b23eb
technical-debt-reviewer is a command published in the GitHub repository kellvembarbosa/team-orchestrator (4 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 132 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 83% identical to accessibility-analyst, differing in 6 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
octo-deliver
Delivery phase - Review, validate, and test with multi-AI quality assurance.
octo-prd-score
Score an existing PRD against the 100-point AI-optimization framework.
octo-staged-review
When the user explicitly invokes /octo:staged-review, you MUST execute the structured workflow below. You are PROHIBITED from doing the task directly, skipping the review phases, or deciding the task is "too simple" for this workflow. The user chose this command deliberately — respect that choice.
octo-review
Enhanced multi-LLM review with inline PR comments — escalation path beyond Claude-native /review.
octo-develop
Development phase - Build solutions with multi-AI implementation and quality gates.
done
Finish a task - document, create PR or merge, close.