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/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-workWrote 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/plugins/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion-honesty)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/plugins/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion-honesty"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/plugins/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion-honesty/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/plugins/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion-honesty"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/plugins/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work/second-opinion-honesty.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>Grade A, and why
second-opinion-honesty 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.
What it actually says
{
"name": "second-opinion-honesty",
"description": "Independent adversarial honesty reviewer for a DRAFT output: checks claims-vs-evidence (no fabrication, no overreach, no invented IDs) before a human approves. FULL mode reads an agentic-sop-kit run dir's trace; DEGRADED mode reviews any plain document with user-supplied inputs. Deterministic honesty checks in code + a capped ADVISORY adversarial LLM pass. The report is itself a DRAFT — a human owns the verdict; it never auto-approves or auto-rejects. An optional project-scoped Stop-hook can enforce that a human acknowledged a review before the session ends. Not a source-code reviewer.",
"version": "0.2.0",
"author": { "name": "s0912758806p", "url": "https://github.com/s0912758806p" },
"homepage": "https://github.com/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work",
"repository": "https://github.com/s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work",
"license": "MIT",
"keywords": [
"second-opinion", "honesty", "claims-vs-evidence", "adversarial-review",
"fact-check", "no-fabrication", "draft-review", "domain-neutral",
"agentic-sop", "claude-code", "skills", "hooks", "stop-hook", "acknowledgement"
]
}
What it installs
The manifest is a name and a version. 1 skill, 1 command travel with it, and installing the plugin installs all of them — 325 tokens a session between them. Each is measured on its own page, and each can be installed alone.
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 · 15 lines scan A 4fc9bd609c56
second-opinion-honesty is a plugin published in the GitHub repository s0912758806p/agentic-sop-to-work (206 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. Its token cost is not measured: this kind of file is read by the harness, not the model. 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 plugins, from other repositories
aspark
An agile AI product team for Claude Code — Specify, Plan, Act, Review, Keep. A Product Owner, Designer, Engineering Manager, Reviewer, QA Tester and Release Manager work your feature through a gated delivery loop.
x-dev-pipeline
Structured dev workflow with spec, user-global risk RAG, task breakdown, execution, verify, qa-gate, fix loops, and audits.
pocketto marketplace
Pocket-driven development skills for Claude Code.
pocketto
Pocket-driven development skills: structured subagent delegation, bug hunting, iterative planning, and code review workflows for Claude Code.
gh-workflow
Generic GitHub workflow commands for issue management, PR creation, code review, and releases. Works with any repository by auto-detecting settings.
han-research
Pre-planning knowledge-work skills for the Han suite: understanding a problem before anyone commits to a plan. Home of research (research an open-ended question and end at an adversarially-validated recommendation), gap-analysis (compare two artifacts and report what is missing, incomplete, or conflicting), and…