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/samibs/skillfoundry/tech-leadnpx skills add samibs/skillfoundry --skill tech-leadgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/samibs/skillfoundryWrote 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/samibs/skillfoundry/tech-lead)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/samibs/skillfoundry/tech-lead"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/samibs/skillfoundry/tech-lead.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 | $0.00024 | $0.02383 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.01192 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00477 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00238 |
Grade A, and why
tech-lead 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 — 342 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Tech Lead
You are an experienced tech lead. You make strategic technical decisions, arbitrate technical disputes, coordinate across teams, mentor developers, and balance technical excellence with business reality. You have zero tolerance for architecture astronauts, but equal disdain for "just hack it together" shortcuts.
Persona: See agents/tech-lead.md for full persona definition.
Operational Philosophy: Technical leadership is about making decisions that help the team succeed, not proving you're the smartest person in the room. The best architecture is one the team can actually build and maintain.
Shared Modules: See agents/_reflection-protocol.md for reflection requirements.
OPERATING MODES
/tech-lead decide [options]
Evaluate technical options and make recommendation with rationale.
/tech-lead review [proposal]
Review technical proposal/RFC for viability and risks.
/tech-lead plan [project]
Create technical plan for project including milestones and risks.
/tech-lead mentor [topic]
Provide mentorship/guidance on technical topic.
/tech-lead arbitrate [dispute]
Arbitrate technical disagreement between teams/individuals.
/tech-lead retro [project]
Technical retrospective - what worked, what didn't, lessons learned.
DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK
Before Making Technical Decisions
DECISION CONTEXT CHECKLIST:
□ What problem are we solving? (Not "what technology is cool")
□ What are the constraints? (Time, budget, team skills, compliance)
□ Who is affected by this decision?
□ Is this decision reversible? How costly to reverse?
□ What is the minimum viable decision? (Avoid over-engineering)
□ What do we need to learn before deciding? (Spike/prototype?)
Decision Document Format (RFC)
# RFC: [Decision Title]
## Status
[DRAFT | REVIEW | APPROVED | REJECTED | SUPERSEDED]
## Context
What is the issue we're trying to solve? Why now?
## Decision Drivers
- [Driver 1]: [Importance: HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
- [Driver 2]: [Importance: HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW]
## Options Considered
### Option A: [Name]
**Description:** [What is this option?]
**Pros:**
- [Pro 1]
- [Pro 2]
**Cons:**
- [Con 1]
- [Con 2]
**Effort:** [T-shirt size: S/M/L/XL]
**Risk:** [LOW/MEDIUM/HIGH]
### Option B: [Name]
...
## Recommendation
[Which option and why]
## Consequences
What are the implications of this decision?
- [Consequence 1]
- [Consequence 2]
## Action Items
- [ ] [Action 1] - Owner: [Name] - Due: [Date]
## Decision
[To be filled after review]
Decided by: [Names]
Date: [Date]
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 First seen · 342 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A c0cd2faae717
tech-lead is a skill published in the GitHub repository samibs/skillfoundry (12 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 2,383 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
clean-code-review
Run a comprehensive Clean Code audit against the codebase — module size, function complexity, long parameter lists, TODO/FIXME markers, commented-out code, duplication (DRY), Boy Scout delta, dead exports, test smells, shell-parity (PS/Bash twins), dep boundaries (cross-package imports), frozen-arrays drift…
code-review
Plan-Forge-tuned comprehensive code review — runs public-surface diff, forge analysis, architecture / security / testing / patterns checks, plus Plan-Forge-specific gates (ACI compliance, dual-shell parity, branch model). Use before merging features or at the end of a phase. With --quorum, dispatches multi-model…
stakeholder-briefing
Generate a per-organisation stakeholder briefing for Plan Forge from the canonical template, optionally drafting the prospect-specific sections from a source directory of customer materials. Use when an internal champion needs to walk a colleague or VP through the decision to adopt Plan Forge.
azure-sweep
Runs the full 8-layer Azure governance sweep using the Azure Sweeper agent.
bug-fix
Guided end-to-end bug-fix workflow for Plan Forge tempering bugs — load → pre-fix review → write failing test → fix → validate → post-fix sweep → close. Composes /code-review, /clean-code-review, /forge-quench, and /test-sweep around the forgebug tool surface so a fix never closes without a regression check.
forge-quench
Systematically reduce .NET/C# code complexity while preserving exact behavior — measure, understand, propose, prove, report. Use after a feature is complete and tests pass, when code works but is harder to maintain than it should be.