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 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00214 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $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 2mo 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.
- 2mo 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 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 535 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-30.
approve_ingest compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| approve_ingestsongzhuozhu/obsidian-llm-wiki | Command | 121 | 6mo ago | MIT | A | 31 | Claude Code |
| checklistgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| clarifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 27 | Claude Code |
| specifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| analyzegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |
| convergegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| implementgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 14 | Claude Code |