Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Raven-Scout/Scoutnpx agentmods add commands/raven-scout/scout/scout-meta-reviewWrote 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/raven-scout/scout/scout-meta-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/raven-scout/scout/scout-meta-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/raven-scout/scout/scout-meta-review/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/raven-scout/scout/scout-meta-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/raven-scout/scout/scout-meta-review.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 | $0.00061 | $0.02330 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00932 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00466 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00233 |
Grade A, and why
scout-meta-review 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 3d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- scout-meta-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 252 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Scout Meta Review
Run an interactive Scout Meta Review — a system-level audit that sits ABOVE the individual session types (briefing, consolidation, dreaming, research, work).
This is NOT a Scout session. It does not read SKILL.md or DREAMING.md. It reviews the Scout system itself: are all the parts working together? Are improvements actually improving things? Is anything rotting, stalling, or drifting?
Run this in the current conversation so the user has full visibility. Run it weekly, or whenever something feels off.
Phase 1: System Health Check
Read scout-config.yaml first to locate the Scout directory (scout_dir) and the user's Slack ID (if Slack is enabled).
1a: Session Execution Audit
Check whether Scout sessions are actually running and completing:
# Count sessions by type in the last 7 days
for type in scout dreaming research; do
echo "=== $type ==="
ls -1 <SCOUT_DIR>/.scout-logs/${type}-*.log 2>/dev/null | while read f; do
mod=$(stat -f '%Sm' -t '%Y-%m-%d' "$f" 2>/dev/null || stat -c '%y' "$f" 2>/dev/null | cut -d' ' -f1)
echo "$mod $(basename "$f")"
done | sort -r | head -20
done
# Check for failures
cat <SCOUT_DIR>/.scout-logs/failures.log 2>/dev/null | tail -20
# macOS: check launchd. Linux: check cron.
launchctl list | grep -i scout 2>/dev/null || crontab -l 2>/dev/null | grep -i scout || echo "No scheduled jobs found"
Report:
- Sessions per day by type (last 7 days)
- Failure rate (failures / total runs)
- Any session types not running at all
- Gaps in schedule (e.g., no afternoon consolidation for 3 days)
1b: Git Health
cd <SCOUT_DIR> && git log --oneline --since="7 days ago" | head -30
cd <SCOUT_DIR> && git status
- Are sessions committing? Average commits per day?
- Any uncommitted changes lingering?
- Commit message patterns — are they following conventions (
briefing [HH:MM]:,dreaming [HH:MM]:,work [HH:MM]:)?
1c: Budget & Cost
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 252 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A b3e15581fe8b
scout-meta-review is a command published in the GitHub repository Raven-Scout/Scout (19 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 2,330 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-10-06.
Other commands, from other repositories
scout-work
Interactive work session — walks through today's actionable items one at a time, presents a recommended action with draft content, and executes each one only with explicit approval. Runs in the current conversation (not as a background session).
pm-learn
Auto-extract repeatable patterns, decisions, and cost outliers from the current session and append to .great-pm/lessons.md. Promotes ≥3-occurrence patterns to /.great-pm/decisions.md. Runs continuous-learner.
pm-save
Extract lessons from this session and save them to .great-pm/lessons.md. Optional cross-project promotion to /.great-pm/decisions.md for patterns seen 3+ times (proposed, never auto-promoted).
pm-resume
Pick up where you left off. Reads .great-pm/HANDOFF.md (auto-saved by the PreCompact hook) and orients you with the next concrete step.
scout-meta-review
Run an interactive Scout meta-review — a system-level audit that sits above the individual session types. Checks whether sessions are running, mistake audit is trending well, proposals are flowing, KB files are healthy, and data-source coverage is consistent across session types. Runs in the current conversation.
triage
Process the user-feedback queue — triage new reports, keep the status mirror honest, and (at release time only) send the shipped emails.