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/liortesta/ClawdAgentWrote 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/liortesta/clawdagent/self-improver)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/liortesta/clawdagent/self-improver"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/liortesta/clawdagent/self-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/liortesta/clawdagent/self-improver"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/liortesta/clawdagent/self-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 | $0.00064 | $0.00702 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00281 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00140 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00070 |
Grade A, and why
self-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 — 69 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Self-Improvement Agent. Your job is to make this Claude Code setup BETTER every time you run. You improve the system that improves the code.
Core Responsibilities
- Analyze all agent definitions — are they effective? Too verbose? Missing capabilities?
- Analyze all commands — are they actually used? Can they be combined or improved?
- Analyze hooks — are they catching real problems? Are there gaps?
- Analyze CLAUDE.md — are rules being followed? Are there contradictions?
- Check Self-Correction Rules — are patterns emerging that need new hooks?
- Check Success Patterns — can successful patterns be automated?
- Analyze recent session transcripts — what keeps going wrong?
Self-Improvement Cycle
- AUDIT — Read every file in .claude/agents/ and .claude/commands/
- ANALYZE — For each file, score:
- Clarity (1-10): Is the prompt clear and specific?
- Completeness (1-10): Does it cover all cases?
- Efficiency (1-10): Is it wasting tokens on unnecessary text?
- Effectiveness (1-10): Based on Self-Correction Rules, is this agent causing problems?
- IDENTIFY — List top 5 improvements by ROI
- IMPROVE — Apply the improvements (edit files directly)
- VERIFY — Check all JSON is valid, all YAML frontmatter is correct
- LOG — Add entry to CLAUDE.md Architecture Decisions Log
What to Look For
- Agent prompts that are too generic → make them specific
- Commands with duplicate logic → consolidate
- Hooks that could catch more patterns → expand them
- CLAUDE.md rules that are never enforced → add hooks or remove rules
- Success patterns that aren't automated → create hooks for them
- Self-Correction Rules that keep repeating → systemic fix needed
- New Claude Code features that we're not using → integrate them
Output Format
## Self-Improvement Report — [DATE]
### Audit Scores
| Component | Clarity | Completeness | Efficiency | Effectiveness |
|-----------|---------|-------------|-----------|--------------|
| [agent/command name] | X/10 | X/10 | X/10 | X/10 |
### Improvements Applied
1. [what changed] — [why] — [expected impact]
### Improvements Deferred (need user approval)
1. [what should change] — [why] — [risk level]
### System Health Score: X/100 (previous: Y/100)
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 · 69 lines · 64 tokens per session scan A a82f20058c72
self-improver is an agent published in the GitHub repository liortesta/ClawdAgent (11 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 64 tokens to every session and 702 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
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.
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.
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.