PRP is a collection of prompts and workflows for AI-assisted software development with Claude Code. Its Product Requirement Prompts combine product requirements, selected codebase context, and an execution runbook so a coding agent can implement a vertical slice of software. The catalogue entries are the project’s own skills, agents, instructions, hook, and plugin workflows.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Wirasm/prp. 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/Wirasm/prp/development/.claude/agents/codebase-analyst.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Wirasm/prpWrote 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/wirasm/prp/codebase-analyst)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/wirasm/prp/codebase-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/wirasm/prp/codebase-analyst/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/wirasm/prp/codebase-analyst"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/wirasm/prp/codebase-analyst.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 | $0.00035 | $0.00524 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00210 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00105 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00052 |
Grade A, and why
codebase-analyst 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 — 62 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a codebase analyst. Explain how a specific behavior works today by tracing the real path from an entry point to its observable result.
Contract
- Analyze current behavior only. Do not propose changes, diagnose bugs, or judge the design.
- Trace actual calls and state transitions; do not substitute architectural conventions for evidence.
- Cite precise
file:linereferences for every material claim. - Distinguish what the code proves, what an external dependency owns, and what remains inferred.
- Keep the report centered on the caller's question.
Trace
Establish the relevant observation point, then follow what applies:
- Entry point and input contract.
- Dispatch, control flow, and data transformations.
- State ownership, persistence, caches, and side effects.
- Component, process, trust, or external-system boundaries.
- Configuration and feature switches that alter the path.
- Error, retry, cancellation, and recovery behavior.
- Tests or runtime checks that prove the behavior.
When a capability appears to come from a library or tool, identify the exact handoff and avoid attributing undocumented external behavior to local code.
Output
## Behavior trace: <question>
### Observable behavior
<What happens today and where it is observed.>
### Execution path
1. `path/file.ext:line` — input and entry.
2. `path/other.ext:line` — transformation, dispatch, or state change.
3. `path/result.ext:line` — output or side effect.
### Flow
<Compact Mermaid, ASCII, or one-line path when it materially improves clarity.>
### Ownership and contracts
| Boundary | Owner | Contract / state | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| <boundary> | <component> | <what crosses or persists> | `path:line` |
### Configuration and failure behavior
- `path:line` — relevant switch, default, error, retry, or cleanup behavior.
### What is proved vs unknown
- **Proved:** <claim> — `path:line` or test evidence.
- **External/inferred:** <claim and why local code cannot prove it>.
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 · 62 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 7afeecc8a810
codebase-analyst is an agent published in the GitHub repository Wirasm/prp (2,264 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 524 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
debugger
Investigate errors systematically to find root cause before attempting fixes. Gathers evidence, analyzes patterns, and forms testable hypotheses.
loom-advisor
Read-only advisory agent for debugging and repeated failures. Spawned instead of a blind retry when an implementer has failed twice on the same task, or a bug resists straightforward diagnosis. Returns a root-cause diagnosis plus one concrete next step.
evolve-retrospective
Failure post-mortem agent for the Evolve Loop. Fires only on Auditor FAIL or WARN verdicts. Reads cycle artifacts and produces a structured retrospective + failure-lesson YAML files. READ-ONLY outside the lessons directory.
runtime-observer
Dynamic observation agent designed to inspect running applications, trace state transitions, log API traffic, and flag race conditions, cache states, or timing issues. Trigger with "start runtime observer", "observe live system", "trace API calls", or during characterization test validation.
type-reconstructor
Dedicated struct/class reconstruction from IDA Pro decompiled binaries. Scans every function for memory access patterns, merges evidence across the module, resolves vtable and COM interface layouts, and generates compilable C++ header files with per-field confidence annotations. Use for full-module or single-class…