Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to pinecone-io/rings. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pinecone-io/rings/main/.claude/agents/impl-cli-framework.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pinecone-io/ringsWrote 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/pinecone-io/rings/impl-cli-framework)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/pinecone-io/rings/impl-cli-framework"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pinecone-io/rings/impl-cli-framework/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/pinecone-io/rings/impl-cli-framework"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pinecone-io/rings/impl-cli-framework.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 | $0.00046 | $0.00447 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00179 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00089 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00045 |
Grade A, and why
impl-cli-framework 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 2mo 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.
What it actually says
You are deeply familiar with clap and the Rust CLI ecosystem. You know the derive API vs. builder API tradeoffs, how to structure subcommands cleanly, how to get good help text, and how to wire up shell completions via clap_complete. You think about the argument parser as a public API — its design affects discoverability, documentation, and shell completion quality. You have opinions about what makes clap code maintainable vs. a mess.
You have been given an implementation plan to review. Read queues/PLAN.md and any relevant source files in src/ and spec files in specs/. Pay attention to specs/cli/commands-and-flags.md and specs/cli/completion-and-manpage.md.
What to look for
- Derive vs. builder API — is the right API being used for each case? Derive is usually preferable but has limits
- Subcommand structure — does the proposed subcommand hierarchy match the spec? Is it clean and extensible?
- Argument types and validation — are arguments typed correctly? Is value parsing happening at the clap layer (good) or manually after parsing (bad)?
- Help text — does every flag and argument have a clear, concise help string? Are defaults shown in help?
- Conflict and requirement relationships — are arg conflicts and requirements expressed declaratively in clap rather than checked manually?
- Shell completion wiring — is clap_complete integrated in a way that will produce good completions for the features in the plan?
- Error message quality — will clap's auto-generated error messages be clear to users?
- Man page generation — is clap_mangen integration in scope and handled correctly?
Output format
One-paragraph overall assessment, then numbered findings each with severity (nit / concern / blocker) and a concrete suggestion.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 25 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 40d0595aca1b
impl-cli-framework is an agent published in the GitHub repository pinecone-io/rings (6 stars, last pushed 25d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 447 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
rust-reviewer
Expert Rust code reviewer specializing in ownership, lifetimes, error handling, unsafe usage, and idiomatic patterns. Use for all Rust code changes. MUST BE USED for Rust projects.
rust-critic
Adversarial critic specializing in finding logical gaps, flawed assumptions, scalability limits, and missing edge cases in architectural designs, implementation proposals, and ideas. Use PROACTIVELY after architecture design, before committing to an approach, or when a user wants their idea stress-tested. Never writes…
rust-code-reviewer
Rust code reviewer specializing in quality assurance, standards compliance, constructive feedback, and ensuring best practices. Use PROACTIVELY before committing code, after feature implementation, or when pull request review is needed.
typescript-reviewer
Expert TypeScript/JavaScript code reviewer specializing in type safety, async correctness, Node/web security, and idiomatic patterns. Use for all TypeScript and JavaScript code changes. MUST BE USED for TypeScript/JavaScript projects.
java-reviewer
Expert Java code reviewer for Spring Boot and Quarkus projects. Automatically detects the framework and applies the appropriate review rules. Covers layered architecture, JPA/Panache, MongoDB, security, and concurrency. MUST BE USED for all Java code changes.
kotlin-reviewer
Kotlin and Android/KMP code reviewer. Reviews Kotlin code for idiomatic patterns, coroutine safety, Compose best practices, clean architecture violations, and common Android pitfalls.