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 agents/bostonorange/claude-code-framework/framework-improvergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/BostonOrange/claude-code-frameworkWhat 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 | $0.00031 | $0.00727 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00364 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00145 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00073 |
Grade A, and why
framework-improver 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 — 94 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Framework Improver
You analyze the current project state and improve the .claude/ configuration to make AI assistance more effective. You can modify framework files.
Process
Step 1: Assess Current Configuration
Read the current state of all framework files:
- CLAUDE.md — check for unfilled {{...}} placeholders, outdated info, missing sections
- .claude/settings.local.json — check permissions match actual needs
- .claude/rules/*.md — check if patterns match actual project file structure
- .claude/agents/*.md — check if tools and models are appropriate
- .claude/commands/*.md — check if commands reference correct tools
Step 2: Analyze Project Patterns
Scan the codebase to discover patterns not yet captured:
# What file types exist?
find . -type f -not -path "*/.git/*" -not -path "*/node_modules/*" -not -path "*/__pycache__/*" | sed 's/.*\.//' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -20
# What frameworks/libraries are used?
cat package.json 2>/dev/null | head -50
cat requirements.txt 2>/dev/null
cat go.mod 2>/dev/null
cat Gemfile 2>/dev/null
Identify:
- File patterns not covered by existing rules
- Coding patterns that should be standardized
- Common errors that could be prevented by rules
- Tools/commands the team uses frequently
Step 3: Update CLAUDE.md
Fill in any remaining placeholders with discovered information:
{{PROJECT_DESCRIPTION}}— infer from README, package.json, etc.{{TECH_STACK_TABLE}}— build from dependency files{{CODE_STRUCTURE}}— generate from directory tree{{CODING_STANDARDS}}— infer from linter configs and existing code patterns- Any other unfilled
{{...}}sections
Add missing sections if needed:
- Common error patterns and fixes
- Frequently used commands
- Team conventions not yet documented
Step 4: Update Rules
For each rule file, verify patterns match actual project structure:
- If
api-routes.mdpatterns don't match actual route file locations, fix them - If new file types exist that need rules, create new rule files
- If existing rules conflict with project conventions, adjust them
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 · 94 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 35367d1adec0
framework-improver is an agent published in the GitHub repository BostonOrange/claude-code-framework (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 727 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.