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/review-crm)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc/review-crm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc/review-crm/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/review-crm"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc/review-crm.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 | $0.00010 | $0.01456 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00728 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00291 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00146 |
Grade A, and why
review-crm 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 12d 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
100% identical to review-crm — 0 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 152 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/grc:review-crm
Review a Customer Responsibility Matrix (CRM) or Customer Implementation Summary (CIS) for coverage, clarity, and completeness.
Usage
/grc:review-crm [framework?] [baseline?]
The user pastes their CRM content after invoking the command.
Arguments
- framework (optional):
fedramp,nist,fisma. Defaults tofedramp. - baseline (optional):
low,moderate,high. Defaults tomoderate.
Examples
/grc:review-crm
/grc:review-crm fedramp moderate
/grc:review-crm fedramp high
/grc:review-crm nist moderate
Behavior
When invoked:
-
Display the Data Sensitivity Notice at the top of every response (see SKILL.md Data Handling section).
-
Read the appropriate reference files:
skills/grc-knowledge/audits/document-section-requirements.mdfor CRM requirements and expected distribution- Framework file from
skills/grc-knowledge/frameworks/for baseline control list skills/grc-knowledge/audits/narrative-quality-criteria.mdfor quality indicators
-
Evaluate the CRM against these criteria:
a. Coverage Assessment
- Count controls/families present in the CRM vs. total baseline controls
- Calculate overall coverage percentage
- Identify missing control families entirely
- Identify individual controls with customer responsibility that are not addressed
b. Responsibility Distribution Categorize each control's designation and report the distribution:
- CSP-Implemented: CSP fully handles
- Customer-Implemented: Customer must fully implement
- Shared: Both parties (must specify the split)
- Inherited: From underlying infrastructure provider Compare the distribution against expected patterns (see document-section-requirements.md)
c. Clarity Assessment For each entry (especially Shared controls):
- Is the customer's responsibility clearly described?
- Are specific actions identified (not just "customer is responsible")?
- Are customer-responsible ODP values called out?
- Can a customer read this and know exactly what they need to do?
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 152 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A 2ed40b9bcf1e
review-crm is a command published in the GitHub repository nathanimphilipos/synergos-grc (5 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 1,456 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to review-crm, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
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.