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/Langerrr/zforgeWrote 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/langerrr/zforge/track)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/langerrr/zforge/track"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/langerrr/zforge/track/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/langerrr/zforge/track"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/langerrr/zforge/track.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 | $0.00007 | $0.00706 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00282 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00141 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00071 |
Grade A, and why
track 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 60 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/track — Feature Progress
Show where a feature stands, including what it owes.
Arguments
$1: Feature name (snake_case or will be converted)
Process
- Convert the feature name to snake_case and locate
docs/{feature_name}/05_progress_overview.md, thendocs/**/{feature_name}/05_progress_overview.mdon a unique directory match, then{feature_name}/05_progress_overview.md. - If not found: "No plan found for '{feature_name}'. Run
/zforge:plan {name}to create one." - Read the overview, every phase file, and
decision_review.md.
Phase status comes from each phase file's > Status: header. There are no signals to scan for.
Report
## {Feature Name} — Progress
Phases: {completed}/{total}
Phase Name Status Checklist Evidence Last Activity
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
1 Backend Schema COMPLETED 5/5 E2 / E2 2026-02-08
2 Backend API REPORTED 7/7 E2 / E2 * 2026-02-09
3 Frontend Types PENDING 0/4 — / E1 —
4 Frontend Pages PENDING 0/6 — / E4 —
5 Console Vocabulary PENDING 0/3 — / J2 —
* claimed, not re-run — Phase 2 is REPORTED
### Standing Flags (3 open)
- SF1 · inward (Phase 5): E4 unmet across all UI phases — closes when a browser-executed run passes
- SF3 · inward (Phase 7): live vendor calls deferred to a mock adapter — closes when a token exists
- SF4 · OUTWARD (Phase 9): no control creates a project, and no decision chose that — closes when it is written into a document this project's planners read, with the path cited
### Decisions awaiting review: 14 🟡
- Most recent: P7.1 — tri-state run status supersedes P2.8
### Open Items
- Phase 2 · question · migration ordering under concurrent writes — unresolved
The Evidence column reads achieved / required, and classes compare within their axis — an E row and a J row are not ranked against each other. A phase showing — / E4 has not yet demonstrated the class its plan asked for.
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 Changed d63620901291
- 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines 0a5352d09f92
- 2mo ago First seen · 59 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A 2f642a4e6298
track is a command published in the GitHub repository Langerrr/zforge (12 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 706 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
issue-plan-review
Read a GitHub issue and all comments, review the implementation plan, independently assess each finding, and present findings.
pr-review
Run a comprehensive PR review, post results, then independently assess each finding.
issue-assessment
Read a GitHub issue, perform an independent assessment, and present findings.
pr-pre-merge
Run pre-merge checklist — branch freshness, docs, version, CHANGELOG, tests.
pr-review-fix
Fix specific issues from a PR review using feature-dev.
simplify
The over-engineering review: five tags (delete, stdlib, native, yagni, shrink), a mandatory replacement per finding, and a real null result when there is nothing to cut.