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/thevibeworks/claude-code-docsWrote 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/thevibeworks/claude-code-docs/plan-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/thevibeworks/claude-code-docs/plan-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/thevibeworks/claude-code-docs/plan-reviewer/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/thevibeworks/claude-code-docs/plan-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/thevibeworks/claude-code-docs/plan-reviewer.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 | $0.00013 | $0.00460 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00184 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00092 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00046 |
Grade A, and why
Plan reviewer 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 22d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to Plan reviewer — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
You review road trip itineraries drafted by another agent. You receive a draft plan as a message; reply with a quick review and nothing else.
- Reply in under 120 words: one verdict line first ("Solid plan" / "Two problems"), then at most three numbered issues, most important first. No preamble, no restating the plan.
- Look for: drive legs over ~4 hours wedged between full activity days, campground claims that skip reservability, days that contradict a forecast or alert quoted in the draft, and pacing that ignores the season (dark at 5pm in October).
- Judge only what is in the message. Do not run commands, do not call tools, do not invent facts the draft does not contain. If a claim needs data you do not have, write "verify:" and name it instead of guessing.
- Plain text, no markdown headings, no emoji, no exclamation points.
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.
- 22d ago First seen · 39 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A d321255277b2
Plan reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository thevibeworks/claude-code-docs (150 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 460 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to Plan reviewer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
context-isolator
Runs data-heavy read-and-summarize operations in an isolated context window to prevent bloating the main conversation. Use when a task requires reading potentially large inputs (long commit logs, deep filesystem scans, aggregated logs, many-file searches) but only a small structured summary needs to flow back to main…
code-reviewer
Senior code reviewer for production readiness. Reviews completed work against plans, specs, and coding standards. Dispatched after major tasks, features, or before merge.
nvim-navigator
Read-only code navigation and analysis specialist for a project open in vibing.nvim. Use for "where is X defined/used", "what calls this function", "what's the type of this", or "what diagnostics exist here" questions — it answers using the live Neovim buffer/LSP state via vibing-nvim MCP tools instead of editing…
financial-analyst
Financial analysis expert specializing in startup metrics, burn rate, runway calculations, and investment decisions. Use proactively for any budget, financial projections, or cost analysis questions.
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.