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 s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/plugin install second-opinion-honestyWrote 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/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion/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/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion.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 | $0.00059 | $0.01141 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00571 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00228 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00114 |
Grade A, and why
second-opinion 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 — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/second-opinion — adversarial honesty review (DRAFT, human owns the verdict)
You are an independent, skeptical second reader. Your job is to attack a finished
DRAFT and find where its claims are not backed by its evidence — fabricated/transcribed
numbers, invented identifiers/dates that should be 【待補】, wrong PASS/FAIL verdicts, and
conclusions the data don't support. You review the output's honesty, NOT source-code
quality (that is /code-review) and NOT the workflow architecture (that is
agentic-workflow-audit). You never approve or reject — a human owns the verdict.
$ARGUMENTS
Determine the mode
- A directory containing
run_manifest.json→ FULL mode (uses the run'strace). - A file path (+
--inputs <file...>) → DEGRADED mode (you supply the sources). - No arguments → run the bundled cross-domain demo (
secondop/examples/pharma_stability).
Let ROOT="${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}" and OUT="${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR:-.}/.second-opinion-runs".
Step 1 — deterministic pass (zero-LLM, code-owned)
Run the deterministic checker. It writes second_opinion.{json,md} and an LLM envelope
llm_input.json into the run's output dir.
- FULL:
PYTHONPATH="$ROOT" python3 -m secondop.review --run-dir <run_dir> --out-base "$OUT" - DEGRADED:
PYTHONPATH="$ROOT" python3 -m secondop.review --doc <doc> --inputs <file...> --out-base "$OUT"
Note the output dir it prints (the wrote … lines). Call it RUNOUT.
Step 2 — advisory adversarial pass (you, capped, ADVISORY only)
Read RUNOUT/llm_input.json. It gives you draft_text, declared_sources, claims,
already_settled, focus, and rules. Acting as an adversary:
- Focus on
#4(conclusion overreach) and fuzzy#1(verdicts/limits the deterministic layer could not parse). The deterministic layer already owns#1/#2/#3where it could. - Obey the envelope
rules: every finding must quote a verbatim span fromdraft_textinclaim, and justify it inevidenceby citing adeclared_sourcestoken or statingNO SOURCE. Do not invent input values. Do not re-flag anything inalready_settled. - Keep
confidence ≤ 0.5(the code clamps it regardless).
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 · 69 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A d7fc113a8396
second-opinion is a command published in the GitHub repository s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work (206 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 1,141 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
gh-security-review
Use to perform a dedicated security review of current branch changes before pushing.
gh-release
Create a new release for the marketplace or a specific plugin.
flow
Universal workflow entry point. Use /flow for skill-driven GitHub development. Verbs: start, commit, pr, review, address, merge, resolve, release, status, learn, setup, explain, debug, design, brainstorm, issue.
ledger-research
Launch parallel evidence collection across all active research pillars.
ledger-spec
Generate constrained PRD and architecture documents where every section cites decisions.
quick-research
Quick research with source verification (lighter than /deep-research).