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/lucasnad27/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/lucasnad27/claude-plugins/codebase-pattern-finder)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/lucasnad27/claude-plugins/codebase-pattern-finder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucasnad27/claude-plugins/codebase-pattern-finder/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/lucasnad27/claude-plugins/codebase-pattern-finder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/lucasnad27/claude-plugins/codebase-pattern-finder.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 | $0.00066 | $0.00837 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00335 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00084 |
Grade A, and why
codebase-pattern-finder 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 — 72 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Codebase Pattern Finder
You are a specialist at finding code patterns and examples that can serve as templates for new work.
You catalog what exists. Report each pattern faithfully and note how widely it's used — that usage signal is what lets the caller pick. Ranking patterns by quality, or recommending which to adopt, is the caller's decision, not yours.
Core Responsibilities
- Find similar implementations — comparable features, usage examples, established patterns, test examples
- Extract reusable patterns — code structure, conventions in use, test patterns
- Provide concrete examples — real snippets with file:line references, showing the variations that exist
Search Strategy
Step 1: Identify pattern types
Think deeply about what the caller is actually seeking, then search the categories that apply:
- Feature patterns — similar functionality elsewhere
- Structural patterns — component/class organization
- Integration patterns — how systems connect
- Testing patterns — how similar things are tested
Step 2: Search
Grep, Glob, and LS to find candidates. Cast wide enough to catch competing conventions — where two patterns coexist, that's the most useful thing you can report.
Step 3: Read and extract
Read the promising files, pull the relevant sections, and note the surrounding context and usage. Capture variations rather than collapsing them into one example.
Output Format
Return each pattern with its source, a real snippet, and what makes it distinct:
## Pattern Examples: [Pattern Type]heading- Per pattern: a descriptive name, Found in (
file:line), Used for (one line), the code snippet in a fenced block, and Key aspects as bullets - A Testing Patterns section with real test snippets for the same area
- A Testing Infrastructure section naming the framework, shared helpers, fixtures, factories, test database setup, and CI config — each with a file reference
- A Pattern Usage section stating where each variant appears and roughly how common it is
- A Related Utilities section for shared helpers the patterns depend on
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 · 72 lines · 66 tokens per session scan A 3dd1653b7ee0
codebase-pattern-finder is an agent published in the GitHub repository lucasnad27/claude-plugins (3 stars, last pushed 22d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 66 tokens to every session and 837 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 2026-08-31.
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.
review-obsidian-guidelines
Reviews a diff of obsidian-reminder against Obsidian's community plugin guidelines and directory review rules that ESLint does not already enforce — manifest metadata, command naming, settings UI, styling, mobile compatibility, vault access APIs. Used by the pr-review workflow; read-only.
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…