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/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grcWrote 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/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc/isora-assess)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc/isora-assess"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc/isora-assess/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/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc/isora-assess"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc/isora-assess.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 | $0.00049 | $0.02640 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.01320 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00528 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00264 |
Grade A, and why
isora-assess 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 11d 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 — 207 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ISORA Evidence-Based Risk Assessment
What This Command Does
This is NOT a narrative review. This is NOT a maturity score. This command answers one question per control:
"Based on the evidence artifacts available, can we infer that this control is actually in place and operating?"
It reads the ISORA question set (216 questions across 12 families), then for each question it hunts through every available evidence source to find proof. If proof exists, the answer is favorable. If proof is missing or contradictory, the answer is unfavorable. If proof is indirect but strongly suggestive, it's favorable with an inference note.
Source Files
ISORA Question Set
Path: GovRAMP Ready Question Set/GovRAMP_Ready_Assessment_2026.csv
This CSV has a metadata header block (rows 0-11), a column header at row 12, and question data starting at row 13. The columns are:
| Col | Field | Use |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | text |
The question (e.g., "AC-02 a: Does your organization have a documented list...") |
| 1 | parent |
Parent question text (blank if top-level) |
| 2 | question_category |
Family label (e.g., "AC — Access Control") |
| 3 | show_if_parent |
y = show if parent favorable, n = show if parent unfavorable |
| 4 | explanation_required |
f = when favorable, n = when unfavorable, b = both |
| 5 | weight |
c = critical, h = high, m = medium, l = low, i = informational |
| 6 | allow_explanation |
true / false |
| 7 | help_text |
Full NIST 800-53 Rev 5 control language — READ THIS for each question |
| 8 | question_response_group |
Answer format (e.g., "FedRAMP") |
| 9 | documentation_required |
When docs are required |
| 10 | allow_documentation |
true / false |
Evidence Sources (search in this order)
1. Control-family evidence folders (primary):
evidence/AC-02 Account Management/
evidence/CM-06 Configuration Settings/
... (one folder per in-scope control)
AND the GovRAMP Assessment folder (if populated):
govramp-assessment/
AC-02 Account Management/
CM-06 Configuration Settings/
... etc
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 207 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A d23eeee7632e
isora-assess is a command published in the GitHub repository nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 2,640 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
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.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.