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.
npx agentmods add skills/langerrr/distributed-architect/dist-checknpx skills add Langerrr/distributed-architect --skill dist-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Langerrr/distributed-architectWrote 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/skills/langerrr/distributed-architect/dist-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/langerrr/distributed-architect/dist-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/langerrr/distributed-architect/dist-check.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00106 | $0.00849 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00053 | $0.00425 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00170 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
dist-check 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 yesterday.
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 — 90 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/dist-check — Coding-Time Boundary Analysis
Analyze code changes for distributed system correctness issues. Runs a two-pass analysis: boundary correctness, then concurrency correctness (if topology indicates).
Arguments
$ARGUMENTSmay contain: a file/dir path,--staged, or--diff <range>
Step 1: Gather Changes
Based on $ARGUMENTS:
- If a file/dir path is given, read those files
- If
--staged, rungit diff --cached - If
--diff <range>, rungit diff <range> - If no arguments, run
git difffor uncommitted changes - If no diff at all, ask the user what change to analyze
Identify which components are being modified.
Step 2: Load Project Topology
Look for a topology file in the project (.dist-architect/topology.yaml, or check project CLAUDE.md for location). If none exists, note this and proceed with what you can infer from the code.
Step 3: Classify the Change
For each modified component, determine which boundary signal applies:
| Signal | Condition |
|---|---|
state-mutation |
Changing state/status that another process reads |
data-lifecycle |
Data crossing a serialization, network, or storage boundary |
failure-mode |
Error handling for cross-component operations |
interaction |
New message type, API call, or event between components |
If none apply (purely internal, single-component change), report "No boundary crossing detected" and stop.
Step 4: Pass 1 — Boundary Correctness
Read the relevant reasoning module from ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/modules/ and walk through its checklist. Answer each question concretely for the specific change. Do not skip questions.
Document:
- Each checklist question and your answer
- Any concerns found
- Any assumptions the change makes about other components
Step 5: Pass 2 — Concurrency Correctness
Check the topology: is the component being modified on the "1" side of a 1:N relationship?
- If yes: Read
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/modules/concurrency.mdand walk through its checklist. - If no: Skip this pass. Note: "No concurrency concern at this boundary (1:1 or N-side)."
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.
- yesterday Changed · -4 lines · +82 tokens per session f925e2295931
- 5d ago First seen · 94 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A dd4a07c0ae79
dist-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository Langerrr/distributed-architect (1 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 106 tokens to every session and 849 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 skills, from other repositories
feature-execution
This skill should be used when the user asks to "orchestrate the feature", "run the phases", "resume implementation", "continue the plan", "the phase agent died", "the agent stopped on its usage limit", "accept this phase", "can these phases run in parallel", "is this phase done", "does this shortfall matter", or…
acceptance-agent
Use this agent when a zforge phase has reported DONE and its evidence must be independently verified before the planner accepts it. Typical triggers include $zforge:feature-orchestrate accepting a REPORTED phase during a long chain, and any run where the planner's context is the constrained resource. It reconciles the…
phase-agent
Use this agent when a phase of a zforge feature plan is ready to implement and its work should run in its own context. Typical triggers include $zforge:feature-orchestrate spawning a READY phase, resuming a phase whose agent was interrupted mid-run, and re-running a phase after a decision was rejected in review. See…
template-conventions
This skill should be used when the user asks to "plan a feature", "what goes in the phase file", "which file owns this", "what evidence class is this", "how do I verify a claim no test can settle", "where should this doc go", or when writing, reading or updating any zforge feature document under docs/{feature}/.…
async-reasoning
This skill should be used when implementing or designing code with async data flows — "state management design", "async data flow", "stale data", "cache invalidation", "optimistic update", "init order", "race condition", "write then read", "data not updating", "cache not refreshing", "UI shows old data after save"…
retro
This skill should be used when the user asks to "retro", "evaluate zforge", "review plugin performance", "score this session", or wants to assess how well zforge's workflow served a feature. Evaluates zforge's workflow scaffolding, not the project's technical decisions or LLM reasoning quality.