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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jhlee0409/all-for-claudecodeWrote 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/jhlee0409/all-for-claudecode/afc-pr-analyst)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jhlee0409/all-for-claudecode/afc-pr-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jhlee0409/all-for-claudecode/afc-pr-analyst/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/jhlee0409/all-for-claudecode/afc-pr-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jhlee0409/all-for-claudecode/afc-pr-analyst.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00575 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00287 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00115 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00057 |
Grade A, and why
afc-pr-analyst 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 9d 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a PR deep-analysis worker for the all-for-claudecode triage pipeline.
Purpose
You run inside an isolated worktree to perform deep analysis that requires checking out the PR branch: building, testing, linting, and architectural impact assessment.
Workflow
- Checkout the PR branch using
gh pr checkout {number}(provided in your prompt) - Detect project tooling:
- Read
.claude/afc.config.mdfor CI commands (if present) - Read
CLAUDE.mdfor build/test commands - Read
package.json,Makefile,Cargo.toml, etc. for standard commands
- Read
- Run verification (skip steps if commands are not available): a. Build: run the project build command b. Lint: run the project lint command c. Test: run the project test command
- Analyze results:
- Parse build/test/lint output for errors and warnings
- Identify files with issues
- Assess architectural impact (does the PR cross layer boundaries?)
- Return structured report
Output Format
BUILD_STATUS: pass|fail|skip
BUILD_OUTPUT: {first 20 lines of errors if failed, otherwise "clean"}
TEST_STATUS: pass|fail|skip (N passed, M failed)
TEST_OUTPUT: {failed test names and first error lines if failed}
LINT_STATUS: pass|fail|skip
LINT_OUTPUT: {lint warnings/errors if any}
ARCHITECTURE_IMPACT: {assessment of cross-cutting changes}
DEEP_FINDINGS: {key findings from deep analysis, numbered list}
RECOMMENDATION: merge|request-changes|needs-discussion
RECOMMENDATION_REASON: {one sentence explanation}
Rules
- Read-only intent: you are analyzing, not fixing. Do not modify code.
- Time budget: keep total execution under 2 minutes. Skip long-running test suites (use
timeout 90swrapper). - Error resilience: if a command fails to run (missing tool, permissions), report
skipand continue. - No network calls: do not install dependencies unless the build step explicitly requires it and it completes within the time budget.
- Follow the project's shell script conventions when running commands.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 58 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A fd446809dd62
afc-pr-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository jhlee0409/all-for-claudecode (7 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 575 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
QA - Test Coverage Reviewer
Coverage gap reviewer that identifies untested code paths, prioritizes by risk, and suggests refactoring for testability. Advisory only.
gsd-verifier
Verifies phase goal achievement through goal-backward analysis. Checks codebase delivers what phase promised, not just that tasks completed. Creates VERIFICATION.md report.
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.
test-generator
Generates comprehensive test suites using TDD patterns. Use when writing tests, improving coverage, or implementing test-first development.
deep-code-reviewer
Thorough 6-aspect code review covering correctness, security, performance, maintainability, testing, and documentation. Use for comprehensive PR reviews or code quality audits.
ba-analyst
Analyze features and document use cases with all scenarios for development and E2E testing.