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/songzhuozhu/obsidian-llm-wikiWrote 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/songzhuozhu/obsidian-llm-wiki/approve_ingest)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/songzhuozhu/obsidian-llm-wiki/approve_ingest"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/songzhuozhu/obsidian-llm-wiki/approve_ingest/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/songzhuozhu/obsidian-llm-wiki/approve_ingest"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/songzhuozhu/obsidian-llm-wiki/approve_ingest.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 | $0.00031 | $0.00535 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00267 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00107 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00053 |
Grade A, and why
approve_ingest 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.
What it actually says
Command: approve_ingest
You are the knowledge-maintenance agent for inspool-wiki-en/. Follow inspool-wiki-en/AGENTS.md strictly.
Task for this run: after the user has explicitly confirmed that the ingest result is correct, archive the corresponding pending_review ingest unit into inspool-wiki-en/raw/processed/.
Execute in this order:
- Read
inspool-wiki-en/AGENTS.md. - Review
inspool-wiki-en/raw/index.mdandinspool-wiki-en/wiki/log.md. - Scan
inspool-wiki-en/raw/unprocessed/. - Find ingest units currently marked
pending_review. - If the user specified a batch, process that batch. Otherwise, prioritize the most recently updated
pending_reviewbatch. - Verify that the corresponding wiki pages and
processed_intofields exist. - Record the old and new path for every raw file in that ingest unit.
- Update workflow fields for each raw file, for example:
processing_status: processedreviewed_at: <today>processed_at: <today>
- Move those raw files into
inspool-wiki-en/raw/processed/. - Repair old raw references in source pages and other wiki pages, including at minimum:
raw_notein frontmatter- the "raw material" link under source information
- any other hard-coded
raw/unprocessed/...path strings
- Run a localized self-check to confirm that
inspool-wiki-en/wiki/no longer contains those old paths. - Update
inspool-wiki-en/raw/index.md. - Append an
approvelog entry toinspool-wiki-en/wiki/log.md.
Constraints:
- run this flow only after explicit user approval
- do not substantially rewrite wiki prose during approval
- you must repair path references broken by raw-file movement
- if the path self-check fails, report the remaining stale paths explicitly instead of silently treating the archive as successful
- if the
pending_reviewbatch does not match existing wiki records, report the mismatch before taking action
Output requirements:
- state which ingest unit you are archiving
- list which raw files moved into
processed/ - state clearly whether the stale-path check passed
- if archiving was blocked, explain why
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 · 48 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 6b335072de07
approve_ingest is a command published in the GitHub repository songzhuozhu/obsidian-llm-wiki (121 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 535 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 2026-08-30.
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.
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.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.