blogkit.analyze

blogkit.analyze is a command for Claude Code from agentii-ai/blog-tech-kit. It costs 13 tokens per session (659 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A command that checks whether a blog specification, implementation plan, and task list agree with one another. It also checks whether requirements and success measures are covered by planned work.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review spec.md, plan.md, tasks.md, and optionally research.md for traceability, content-first compliance, timeline consistency, and coverage gaps.
Why use it?
It exposes missing tasks, conflicting blog details, untracked goals, and technology choices placed in the wrong document before implementation begins.

Command for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: a Claude Code command (commands/*.md).

Good fit Use it to review spec.md, plan.md, tasks.md, and optionally research.md for traceability, content-first compliance, timeline consistency, and coverage gaps.

Compare 6 commands from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/agentii-ai/blog-tech-kit/blogkit.analyze
Install

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.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/agentii-ai/blog-tech-kit

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for blogkit.analyze

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/agentii-ai/blog-tech-kit/blogkit.analyze.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/agentii-ai/blog-tech-kit/blogkit.analyze)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/agentii-ai/blog-tech-kit/blogkit.analyze"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/agentii-ai/blog-tech-kit/blogkit.analyze.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 13 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 659 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00013 $0.00659
Opus 5 $0.00006 $0.00329
Sonnet 5 $0.00003 $0.00132
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00066

Measured 8d ago against content hash 97d0d9e5d8ca, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-08, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

blogkit.analyze 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 8d 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:

.blogkit/templates/commands/blogkit.analyze.md · 74 lines

What it actually says

Outline

Perform comprehensive cross-artifact consistency analysis:

  1. Load all artifacts: spec.md, plan.md, tasks.md (and research.md if exists)

  2. Content-First Validation:

    • Verify spec.md contains ZERO technology implementation details
    • Verify plan.md contains all tech stack decisions
    • Flag any technology mentions in spec.md
  3. Requirement Traceability:

    • Map each requirement (CR-001 to CR-020) from spec.md to plan.md sections
    • Map each plan section to tasks.md sprint/phase
    • Identify requirements with no corresponding tasks (coverage gaps)
  4. Success Criteria Alignment:

    • Verify all success criteria (SC-001 to SC-016) from spec.md are addressed in plan.md
    • Check that tasks.md includes measurement tasks for each SC
    • Identify success criteria without tracking implementation
  5. Blog Type Consistency:

    • Verify blog type is consistent across all three documents
    • Check editorial workflow matches blog type (Authority 6-week vs. Practitioner 2-week)
    • Verify content pillars mentioned in plan match spec
  6. Timeline & Sprint Consistency:

    • Verify Sprint 0 duration matches plan.md platform setup timeline
    • Check sprint count (should be 5 content sprints per plan)
    • Validate sprint dependencies align between plan and tasks
  7. Team & Role Consistency:

    • Verify roles defined in plan.md (Writer, SME, Copyeditor, Marketing) are referenced in tasks
    • Check task assignments match role responsibilities
  8. Constitution Principle Enforcement:

    • Verify all 8 Blog Principles are addressed in plan.md Constitution Check section
    • Check that tasks.md includes quality gate checkpoints
    • Ensure no Self-Validation principle enforced (SME review in tasks)
  9. Dependency Analysis:

    • Map task dependencies in tasks.md
    • Verify Sprint 0 is prerequisite for all content sprints
    • Check that measurement tasks reference analytics from plan
  10. Generate Analysis Report:

    • Create markdown report at FEATURE_DIR/analysis-report.md
    • List all consistency checks passed/failed
    • For failures, show specific lines/sections that conflict
    • Provide remediation recommendations
    • Calculate "Consistency Score" (% of checks passed)
  11. Report Results:

    • Display consistency score
    • List any gaps found (requirements not addressed in tasks)
    • List any inconsistencies (conflicting information)
    • Show overall assessment (PASS/FAIL/REVIEW_RECOMMENDED)
    • If issues found, ask user: "Review and fix issues, then re-run analyze?"

NOTE: Cross-artifact analysis catches planning gaps before execution starts.

Changes

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.

  1. 8d ago First seen · 74 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 97d0d9e5d8ca

Subscribe to this mod's changes

blogkit.analyze is a command published in the GitHub repository agentii-ai/blog-tech-kit (10 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 659 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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.