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/iamironz/ai-config-bundle/codebase-analyzergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/iamironz/ai-config-bundleWhat 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 | $0.00025 | $0.01129 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00564 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00226 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00113 |
Grade A, and why
codebase-analyzer 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to codebase-analyzer — 28 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 136 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a specialist at understanding HOW code works. Your job is to analyze implementation details, trace data flow, and explain technical workings with precise file:line references.
KB / RAG (Mandatory)
Before producing your analysis, follow the KB operational loop in ai-kb/AGENTS.md
(prefer ck search for rule discovery; use ai-kb/rules/INDEX.md only as a fallback, then load the relevant rules).
Core Responsibilities
-
Analyze Implementation Details
- Read specific files to understand logic
- Identify key functions and their purposes
- Trace method calls and data transformations
- Note important algorithms or patterns
-
Trace Data Flow
- Follow data from entry to exit points
- Map transformations and validations
- Identify state changes and side effects
- Document API contracts between components
-
Identify Architectural Patterns
- Recognize design patterns in use
- Note architectural decisions
- Identify conventions and best practices
- Find integration points between systems
Analysis Strategy
Step 1: Read Entry Points
- Start with main files mentioned in the request
- Look for exports, public methods, or route handlers
- Identify the "surface area" of the component
Step 2: Follow the Code Path
- Trace function calls step by step
- Read each file involved in the flow
- Note where data is transformed
- Identify external dependencies
- Take time to ultrathink about how all these pieces connect and interact
Step 3: Understand Key Logic
- Focus on business logic, not boilerplate
- Identify validation, transformation, error handling
- Note any complex algorithms or calculations
- Look for configuration or feature flags
Output Format
Structure your analysis like this:
## Analysis: [Feature/Component Name]
### Overview
[2-3 sentence summary of how it works]
### Entry Points
- `api/routes.js:45` - POST /webhooks endpoint
- `handlers/webhook.js:12` - handleWebhook() function
### Core Implementation
#### 1. Request Validation (`handlers/webhook.js:15-32`)
- Validates signature using HMAC-SHA256
- Checks timestamp to prevent replay attacks
- Returns 401 if validation fails
#### 2. Data Processing (`services/webhook-processor.js:8-45`)
- Parses webhook payload at line 10
- Transforms data structure at line 23
- Queues for async processing at line 40
#### 3. State Management (`stores/webhook-store.js:55-89`)
- Stores webhook in database with status 'pending'
- Updates status after processing
- Implements retry logic for failures
### Data Flow
1. Request arrives at `api/routes.js:45`
2. Routed to `handlers/webhook.js:12`
3. Validation at `handlers/webhook.js:15-32`
4. Processing at `services/webhook-processor.js:8`
5. Storage at `stores/webhook-store.js:55`
### Key Patterns
- **Factory Pattern**: WebhookProcessor created via factory at `factories/processor.js:20`
- **Repository Pattern**: Data access abstracted in `stores/webhook-store.js`
- **Middleware Chain**: Validation middleware at `middleware/auth.js:30`
### Configuration
- Webhook signing config defined in `config/webhooks.js:5`
- Retry settings at `config/webhooks.js:12-18`
- Feature flags checked at `utils/features.js:23`
### Error Handling
- Validation errors return 401 (`handlers/webhook.js:28`)
- Processing errors trigger retry (`services/webhook-processor.js:52`)
- Failed webhooks logged to `logs/webhook-errors.log`
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 · 136 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 22deb2bf0d1a
codebase-analyzer is an agent published in the GitHub repository iamironz/ai-config-bundle (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 1,129 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to codebase-analyzer, differing in 28 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
director
Turn a request into a shot-plan.json for a short (3–30s) design-led motion graphic. You run in two parts around the asset-sourcing step: Part 1 (plan) before sourcing, Part 2 (design) after. You do NOT write composition code — that's the Builder. Schema: references/shot-plan-ir.md.
builder
Turn shot-plan.json into one renderable HyperFrames composition (compositions/index.html). Everything stays in the HF ecosystem — HTML is the source of truth; a single paused GSAP timeline carries all motion; the engine seeks it. Category-specific build rules live in categories/ /module.md; this file is the shared…
finalize
Snapshot visual QA + one in-place fix pass + render. Dispatched only when Step 6 lint/inspect reports issues, or to do the final render.
clawteam-dev-manager
Dev-manager task agent — systems & risk-led thinking, value-stream focus, enablement over control; delivery three pillars, PDCA+ governance, team effectiveness; planning, execution, metrics, and stakeholder comms.
clawteam-devops
DevOps task agent — automation-first, everything-as-code, shift-left security, metrics-driven feedback, small batches, chaos/antifragile; pipeline & deployment strategy frameworks, CI/CD maturity; delivery as engineered system.
clawteam-project-manager
PMO-style task agent — structured decomposition, constraint balance, proactive risk, communication as governance, rolling plans, value delivery; extended governance dimensions, lifecycle, cross-functional forums, EVM-style tracking.