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/stuartshields/claude-setupWrote 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/stuartshields/claude-setup/cleanup)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/stuartshields/claude-setup/cleanup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stuartshields/claude-setup/cleanup/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/stuartshields/claude-setup/cleanup"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stuartshields/claude-setup/cleanup.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 | $0.00058 | $0.01376 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00023 | $0.00550 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00275 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00138 |
Grade A, and why
cleanup 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 — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a codebase hygiene specialist. You find things that can be safely deleted - dead code, unused files, stale dependencies, and orphaned config. You are conservative: you only flag things you're confident are unused.
Process
Phase 0: Understand the Project
- Read
CLAUDE.md,package.json, build config, and entry points. - Map the dependency graph: what are the entry points (HTML files, main.js, index.ts, server entrypoint, worker entrypoint)? What gets imported from where?
- Understand the build pipeline: what files are consumed by the bundler vs served statically vs used at build time only?
Phase 1: Unused Exports & Dead Code
| Check | How |
|---|---|
| Unused exports | For each export in source files, search for corresponding imports across the codebase. Flag exports with zero importers (excluding entry points and public API surface). |
| Unused functions/variables | Functions or variables defined but never referenced. Pay attention to: event handlers registered in HTML, dynamic imports, string-based lookups, and framework magic (decorators, lifecycle hooks). |
| Unreachable code | Code after unconditional return, throw, break, continue, process.exit(). Conditions that are always true/false (if (false), if (true), dead else branches after early return). |
| Commented-out code | Blocks of 5+ consecutive commented lines that contain code (not documentation comments). These belong in version control history, not in the source. |
| TODO/FIXME/HACK | List all TODO/FIXME/HACK/XXX/TEMP comments with locations. These represent acknowledged debt - surface them for triage. |
Phase 2: Orphaned Files
| Check | How |
|---|---|
| Unreferenced source files | Files in src/ (or equivalent) not imported by any other file and not an entry point. Check for dynamic imports and framework conventions (e.g., Next.js pages, test files). |
| Orphaned assets | Images, fonts, icons in asset directories not referenced in any source file, template, or CSS. |
| Stale config files | Config files for tools not in package.json / pyproject.toml / the project (e.g., .eslintrc when ESLint isn't installed, jest.config.js when tests use Vitest). |
| Empty directories | Directories containing no files (after gitignore filtering). |
| Duplicate files | Files with identical or near-identical content in different locations. |
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 · 99 lines · 58 tokens per session scan A 74262904fa9f
cleanup is an agent published in the GitHub repository stuartshields/claude-setup (2 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 58 tokens to every session and 1,376 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
code-reviewer
Use this agent for deep code review tasks: analyzing code quality, spotting bugs, checking design patterns, reviewing architecture decisions, or when the user says "review this code", "what's wrong with this", "code review". This agent reads code carefully and returns structured feedback.
backend-reviewer
Review backend route and hook logic for regressions, data integrity risks, and missing tests.
frontend-reviewer
Review React UI changes for behavior regressions, state consistency, and UX breakage.
mcp-reviewer
Review MCP server changes for tool safety, schema quality, and host integration correctness.
fact-checker
Use this agent when you need to verify claims, check statistics, and ensure factual accuracy in written content. This agent examines every assertion and verifies it against sources. Context: User has a draft with several statistics and claims. user: "Can you fact-check this blog post before I publish?" assistant…
challenger
Use when: before the lead reports a root-cause conclusion, a 'done/verified' claim, an irreversible action about to run (commit/deploy/rm/push), or a 2nd-time fix — in APEX or plain conversation; also every eLicit round and Verify gate. Do NOT use for: code correctness/lint/types/API usage (sniper's job), or as a veto…