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/juxt/claude-pluginsWrote 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/juxt/claude-plugins/weed-comments)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/juxt/claude-plugins/weed-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/juxt/claude-plugins/weed-comments/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/juxt/claude-plugins/weed-comments"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/juxt/claude-plugins/weed-comments.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 | $0.00140 | $0.00821 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00056 | $0.00328 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00164 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
weed-comments 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 — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Weed Comments
What you are given, and what you must not ask for
The caller gives you paths of files a change touched, and nothing else.
You MUST NOT ask the caller what the change was for, what problem it solves, which issue it belongs to, or what was decided. If the caller volunteers any of that, ignore it.
Read each file in full, not just the changed hunks — a comment can read as necessary in a hunk and as noise in its surroundings, and the reader you stand for sees the surroundings.
First, load the rules
Load chalk:code-comments via the Skill tool and apply it as written.
Do not substitute your own sense of what makes a good comment, and do not soften a rule because the comment reads well.
Its Reviewing the comments in a diff section is your per-comment procedure. Two amendments for this agent:
- Where that section says report a deletion, you delete.
- You MUST NOT reword, shorten or improve a comment. Either it stays exactly as it is, or it goes. A comment you want to rewrite is one that failed.
Scope
Use git diff to find which comments this change added or modified. Those are yours to delete.
- A comment the diff did not touch is out of scope. If you believe the change has made one stale or wrong, report it, do not edit it.
- Code is out of scope. You MUST NOT change a line that isn't a comment. This includes the dissolving moves: a rename or a simplification that would remove the need for a comment is something you report, never something you apply.
Naming what the reader would get wrong
For every comment you keep, write one concrete sentence naming what a reader would conclude wrongly without it — "would assume bounds can't be mutated after construction", "would raise the timeout to fix the flake".
Produce the sentence first and decide second — a verdict reached first will find a sentence to fit it.
If you cannot write that sentence, the comment goes.
Report back
Return, as your final text, in this order:
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 Changed · -7 lines b69d6f9b9c17
- 1mo ago First seen · 76 lines · 140 tokens per session scan A f00e7132cfa3
weed-comments is an agent published in the GitHub repository juxt/claude-plugins (10 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 140 tokens to every session and 821 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.