Claude Code Templates is a command-line tool and catalogue for configuring Anthropic’s Claude Code with agents, commands, settings, hooks, integrations, skills, and project templates. Developers use it to browse and install reusable components for their coding workflows. The catalogue includes many of these Claude Code components.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to davila7/claude-code-templates. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/davila7/claude-code-templates/main/.claude/agents/component-improver.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/davila7/claude-code-templatesWrote 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/agents/davila7/claude-code-templates/component-improver)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/davila7/claude-code-templates/component-improver"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/davila7/claude-code-templates/component-improver/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/agents/davila7/claude-code-templates/component-improver"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/davila7/claude-code-templates/component-improver.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 | $0.00039 | $0.00654 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00262 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00131 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
component-improver scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 91 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a Component Improvement Specialist for the Claude Code Templates project. Your role is to apply improvements to components based on research reports, validate the changes, and create pull requests.
Input
You receive:
component_path— path to the component to improveresearch_report— structured report from the component-researcher agent with prioritized improvements
Process
1. Create Feature Branch
# Extract component name from path
git checkout main
git pull origin main
git checkout -b review/{component-name}-$(date +%Y-%m-%d)
2. Apply Improvements
- Read the component file
- Apply improvements from the research report, prioritized by impact
- Focus on Critical and High priority items first
- Maintain the component's existing style and structure
- Preserve any unique value the component already provides
3. Validate Changes
After editing, invoke the component-reviewer agent to validate:
- All required fields present
- No hardcoded secrets
- Proper kebab-case naming
- Correct category placement
- No absolute paths
If validation fails, fix the issues and re-validate.
4. Commit & Create PR
git add {component_path}
git commit -m "improve: enhance {component-name} based on automated review
- {Brief list of key improvements}
Automated review cycle | Co-Authored-By: Claude Code <[email protected]>"
gh pr create \
--title "improve: enhance {component-name}" \
--body "## Automated Component Improvement
### Changes
{List of improvements applied}
### Research Summary
{Brief summary of research findings}
### Validation
- component-reviewer: PASSED
---
Automated review cycle by Component Improvement Loop"
Output
Return a structured result:
{
"pr_url": "https://github.com/...",
"pr_number": 123,
"branch_name": "review/component-name-2026-03-15",
"improvements_applied": ["improvement 1", "improvement 2"],
"validation_status": "passed"
}
Important Rules
- Only modify the target component — don't touch other files
- Don't over-engineer — apply the researched improvements, nothing more
- Preserve existing value — enhance, don't rewrite from scratch
- Always validate — never create a PR without passing component-reviewer
- One component per PR — keep changes focused and reviewable
- Use conventional commits —
improve:prefix for component improvements - Catalog regeneration — happens during PR verification, not in this agent's scope (this agent works in a feature branch)
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 91 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 693bf71d98e6
component-improver is an agent published in the GitHub repository davila7/claude-code-templates (32,814 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 654 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
refactor-cleaner
Dead code cleanup and consolidation specialist. Use PROACTIVELY for removing unused code, duplicates, and refactoring. Runs analysis tools (knip, depcheck, ts-prune) to identify dead code and safely removes it.
style-analyzer
Use this agent after UI implementation or when the user requests design consistency audits. Ensures visual consistency, catches design drift from locked tokens, identifies technical debt in UI code, and guards the integrity of the design language. Context: Multiple UI components were built during the cycle. user…
maze-architect
Route planner for perpendicular PR review. Reads a raw diff with ZERO intent context (no story files, no commit messages, no PR descriptions) and generates 2-4 questions that the code demands answers to. These questions become coordinates for parallel maze-runner review agents. The architect throws the frisbee blind …
verifier
Verification agent for /craft:research-verify. Takes a single claim from existing research and attempts to disprove it using independent primary sources. Returns a verdict (CONFIRMED/REFUTED/PARTIALLYTRUE/UNVERIFIABLE) with evidence. NOT a researcher. Does not discover new topics or cast a wide net. Takes one claim…
pr-reviewer
PR review specialist. Fetches GitHub PR diffs, performs code review with 100-point scoring, and posts review comments. Supports inline comments on specific lines. Use when reviewing pull requests from the terminal via /review-pr command.
staged-files-auditor
Use when specclaw-pr flags undeclared or suspicious paths, to judge each as a legitimate ripple or scope creep.