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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplaceWrote 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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/critique)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/critique/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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/critique.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 | $0.00698 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00349 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00140 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
critique 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 10d 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 — 120 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Red Team Critique
Target: $ARGUMENTS
Approach as an adversary finding weaknesses.
Critique Format
For each issue:
CRITIQUE #[N]
Category: [Logic / Evidence / Coverage / Accuracy]
Severity: [1-10]
Location: [where]
Issue: [description]
Fix: [action]
Categories
Logic: Circular reasoning, false dichotomies, hasty generalizations, strawman, post hoc fallacy
Evidence: Unsourced claims, single-source reliance, outdated info, secondary sources, low-credibility
Coverage: Unaddressed questions, missing perspectives, no examples, incomplete comparisons
Accuracy: Factual errors, misrepresentations, overconfident claims, conflated concepts
Severity Guide
- 9-10 Critical: Must fix (errors, core flaws, major gaps)
- 7-8 Significant: Should fix (unsourced, outdated)
- 5-6 Moderate: Consider fixing (weak examples)
- 1-4 Minor: Polish items
Output
## Summary
[2-3 sentences]
## Critical Issues (9-10)
[list]
## Significant Issues (7-8)
[list]
## Moderate Issues (5-6)
[list]
## Priority Actions
1. [first fix]
2. [second]
3. [third]
User Interaction
Use the AskUserQuestion tool when:
- Target content is not specified
- Critique focus area needs clarification
- Severity threshold for reporting should be confirmed
- Multiple critical issues require prioritization guidance
Example Invocations
Missing target:
User: /critique
→ Use AskUserQuestion tool:
Question: "What would you like me to critique?"
Options:
- "Provide a file path"
- "Paste text or claim directly"
- "Critique output from previous analysis"
Focus area clarification:
User: /critique research-report.md
→ Use AskUserQuestion tool:
Question: "What aspects should the critique focus on?"
Options:
- "All categories (Logic, Evidence, Coverage, Accuracy)" (Recommended)
- "Focus on evidence quality and sourcing"
- "Focus on logical reasoning and arguments"
- "Focus on coverage gaps and missing perspectives"
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 120 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A 8c9ce5bc1484
critique is a command published in the GitHub repository synaptiai/synapti-marketplace (6 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 698 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
create-worktree
Follow these steps to create a git worktree.
paper-trail-review
Review and arbitrate problematic references (cascade-exhausted, unresolved UID, awaiting OCR). Generates an up-to-date report, walks through cases by category, and applies arbitration decisions to the registry.
paper-trail-new-paper
Start writing an academic paper (IMRaD structure) on a topic, with anti-hallucination citation verification at every step. Builds on existing audited SOTAs.
paper-trail-registry-cleanup
Nettoyage historique du registre des fiches bibliographiques (les 900 fiches existantes). Cible les vieilles fiches mal nommées (0000, untitled) ET les duplicates avec suffixes numériques (foo2020bar2, 234) qui sont des artefacts de runs INGEST passés. Délègue les décisions au sub-agent textbook-resolver. Les merge…
paper-trail-cascade
Acquire PDFs via the 8-source cascade (11 with opt-in extended sources) for a single ref by slug, or a batch filtered by state. Validates page 1 anti-homonymy on each download.
cc-refactor
(Conductor) Refactor a file or module for clarity and simplicity.